HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-03-19_COUNCIL PACKETAGENDA
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 19, 1990
7:00 P.M.
(Convene Joint HRA /Council Meeting)
ROLLCALL
I. APPROVAL OF JOINT HRA /COUNCIL MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1990
II. PRELIMINARY REPORT - TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS
III. EXTENSION OF RESOLUTION - ACQUISITION OF KUNZ OIL /LEWIS ENGINEERING PROPERTIES
IV. ADJOURNMENT
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
PROCLAMATION - Camp Fire Week
SUPERIOR TO NONE AWARD
I. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS All agenda items marked with an asterisk M
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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of February 5 and Joint ERA /Council
Meeting of March 5, 1990
III. 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. Final Development Plan Approval of Property
Zoned Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass.
A.
Final Development Plan - 7101 -13 Amundson Avenue - George Kosmides -
Generally located at the southeast corner of Cahill Rd and Amundson Av
(Contd from 3/5/90)
B.
Amendment to Comprehensive Plan - Medium Density to Low Density Attached
Residential and Quasi - Public to Low Density Attached Residential and
Single Family Residential - Ron Clark Construction - Generally located
south of West 70th St and west of Cahill Rd
C.
Repeal of Heritage Preservation Overlay District - Ron Clark Construction
- Generally located south of West 70th St and west of Cahill Rd
D.
Rezoning - R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -2 Planned Residential
District - Ron Clark Construction - Generally located south of West 70th
St and west of Cahill Rd
E.
Preliminary Plat Approval - Highcroft - Ron Clark Construction - Generally
located south of West 70th St and west of Cahill Rd
F.
Year XVI Community Development Block Grant Program
* G.
Final Rezoning PRD -4 Planned Residence District to PSR -4. Senior Citizen
District and Final Plat Approval - Walker Methodist and RPI Services, Inc.
Generally located in the northwest quadrant of intersection of York Av and
Parklawn Av (Continue to 4/16/90)
* H.
Set Hearing Date - Release of Restrictive Covenants - South Harriet Park
Steiner Addition (4/2/90)
Agenda
Edina City Council
March 19, 1990
Page Two
IV. ORDINANCES First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only. Second Reading:
Favorable rollcall vote of majority of all members of Council required to pass.
Waiver of Second Reading: 4/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of Council
required to pass.
A. First Reading - Ordinance No. 1031 -A3 - To Define Noxious Weeds, Provide
for Cutting and Removal, Provide for Charging Cost, and Penalty
B. First Reading - Ordinance No..451 -A7 - Amending Ordinance No. 451 to
Correct Error Therein Relating to Size of Sign
V. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS
VI. AWARD OF BIDS
A. Sand, Rock, Bituminous Material, Concrete (Continue to 4/2/90)
B. {dater Treatment Chemicals
C. John Deere Mower
D. Greensmaster Mower
E. Cushman Turf Truckster
F. Emergency Repair of Pump - 72nd Street Lift Station
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS
A.
Approval of Traffic Safety Committee
Minutes of March 13, 1990
B.
Cooperative Construction Agreement -
France Avenue
C.
State Aid Route Changes
D.
Report on Dog Licenses
E.
Appointments - Board of Appeals and
Community Health Services Advisory
Committee
F.
Beer License Renewals
G.
Precinct No. 20 Polling Location
VIII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES
A.
Hennepin County Recycling Recognition
Luncheon - April 18
B.
City of Eden Prairie - Expansion of
Flying Cloud Landfill
C.
Hennepin County Board - "Host Fees"
for Solid Waste Facilities
IX. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL
X. POST AGENDA AND MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
A. Strategic Planning
XI. FINANCE
A. Award of Bid - $3,080,000 G.0. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1990A -
Resolution Awarding Sale, Fixing Form and Details, Providing for Execution
and Delivery Thereof and Security Therefor
B. Payment of Claims as per Check Register dated 03/19/90: Total $579,705.82
SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /EVENTS
Mon Mar 26 Special Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. Council Room
Mon Apr 2 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. Council Room
Mon Apr 16 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. Council Room
Tues Apr 17 Volunteers Reception 5:00 p.m. Braemar Clubhouse
Mon Apr 23 Board of Review 5:00 p.m. Council Room
r
i�
MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY /CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT EDINA CITY HALL
MARCH 5, 1990
A joint meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City
Council was convened to consider concurrently Tax Increment Financing Bonds and
Update on 50th and France Redevelopment Plan Amendment. Action was taken by the
HRA and Council as recorded.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners /Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith
and Chairman /Mayor Richards.
MINUTES of the Joint HRA /Council Meeting of February 20, 1990 were approved as
submitted by motion of Commissioner/Member Paulus, seconded by Commissioner/Member
Smith.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC SALE OF $3,080,000
G.O. TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1990A Assistant Manager Gordon Hughes presented
a resolution formalizing the action of the Council on February 10, 1990, relative
to the call for sale of the $3,080,000 General Obligation Bond issue for the 50th
& France Tax Increment Financing District. He referenced the letter of March 2,
1990 from Jerry Gilligan, bond counsel, who had advised that it would be
advantageous to designate these bonds as qualified tax - exempt obligations. Such a
designation would likely result in a more favorable interest rate for the bonds.
To qualify for such designation, the Council must reasonably anticipate that it
does not intend to issue more than $10,000,000 in governmental bonds in 1990.
Assistant Manager Hughes stated that, based on the facts pointed out in the staff -
report, staff believes the Council can make that finding and would recomfhend
adoption of the resolution authorizing the issuance and calling for public sale of
the bonds.
Mayor Richards called for questions and comment from the Council. Hearing none,
he then called for comment from the public on the proposed sale of tax increment
bonds. No comment was heard.
Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $3,080,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS,
SERIES 1990A; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND
CALLING FOR THE PUBLIC SALE THEREOF
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the City), as
follows:
1. Authorization.
1.01. This Council and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina,
Minnesota (the Authority) have previously approved a redevelopment plan and
redevelopment project under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047, and a
tag increment financing plan, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 to 469.179
designed as the 50th and France Redevelopment Plan (the Redevelopment Plan). It
has been proposed that the City and Authority construct additional public
improvements in the Redevelopment Plan area to further the objectives and goals of
the redevelopment project and Redevelopment Plan (the Project).
1.02. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178 and
Chapter 475, the Council hereby authorizes the issuance and sale of its General
Obligation Tag Increment Bonds, Series 1990A (the Bonds) in the principal amount
of $3,080,000 of which amount $50,000 represents interest as provided in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 475.56, for the purpose of providing funds for the payment of a
portion of the costs of the Project.
2. Sale. This Council shall meet at the time and.place specified in the
notice of sale hereinafter prescribed for the purpose of receiving sealed bids and
1
awarding sale of the Bonds. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
cause a public notice of the time, place and purpose of the meeting to be
published in the official newspaper of the City, and in a daily or weekly
periodical, published in a Minnesota City of the first class, which circulates
throughout the state and furnishes financial news as part of its service, once not
less than ten days before the date of said meeting in substantially the following
form:
NOTICE OF BOND SALE
$3,080,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT
BONDS, SERIES 1990a
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed bids for the purchase of $3,080,000 General
Obligation Tag Increment Bonds, Series 1990A (the Bonds), of the City of Edina,
Minnesota (the City), will be received at the'offices of Public Financial Systems,
Inc., 512 Nicollet Mall, Suite 550, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 until 11:00
o'clock a.m., on Monday, March 19, 1990, at which time the bids will be opened and
'tabulated. The City Council will meet in the City Hall in the City at 7:00
o'clock p.m., that same date to consider the bids and award the sale of the Bonds.
The Bonds will be issued to finance a redevelopment project•to be undertaken in
the City by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City. The
Bonds will be issuable as fully registered bonds in the denomination of $5,000 or
any integral multiple thereof, will be dated, as originally issued, as of March 1,
1990, and wili mature on February 1 in each year as follows:
Year Amount
2002 $700,000
2003 745,000
2004 800,000
2005 835,000
The City will select a suitable bank or trust company to act as Bond Registrar,
Transfer Agent and Paying Agent. Interest will be payable on each February 1 and
August 1 commencing February 1, 1991. The Bonds are each subject subject to
redemption and prepayment at the option of the City and in whole or in
part, and if in part, in inverse order of maturities, on February 1, 1997 and any
interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to the principal amount thereof
to be redeemed plus accrued interest. A legal opinion as to the validity of the
Bonds will be furnished by Dorsey & Whitney, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Copies of
a statement of Terms and Conditions of Sale and additional information may be
obtained from the undersigned or from Public Financial Systems, Inc., 512 Nicollet
Mall, Suite 550, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402; telephone 612 - 333 -9177, financial
consultants to the City.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Marcella M. Daehn
City Clerk
City of Edina, Minnesota
3. Terms and Conditions of Sale. The following statement of Terms and
Conditions of Sale shall constitute the terms and conditions for the sale and
issuance of the Bonds and such terms and conditions are hereby authorized to be
incorporated in material distributed to prospective bidders for the Bonds:
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE
$3,080,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT
BONDS, SERIES 1990A
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
Sealed bids for the purchase of $3,080,000 General Obligation Tax Increment
Bonds, Series 1990A (the Bonds), of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the City), will
be received at the offices of Public Financial Systems, Inc., 512 Nicollet Mall,
Suite 550, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 until 11:00 o'clock, a.m., Monday,
March 19, 1990, at which time the bids will be opened and tabulated. The City
Council will meet at the City Hall in the City at 7:00 o'clock, p.m., on the same
day to consider.the bids and award the sale of the Bonds. This is a statement of
the terms and conditions upon which the bids for the purchase of the Bonds will be.
received, the sale thereof awarded and the Bonds issued.'
PURPOSE AND SECURITY
The Bonds will be issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178 and
Chapter 475, to finance costs of a redevelopment project to be undertaken in the
City by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City. The Bonds
will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full
faith, credit and taxing powers.
DATE. TYPE AND DENOMINATION
The -Bonds will -be dated, as originally issued, as of March 1, 1990, will be
issued as negotiable investment securities in registered form as to both principal
and interest and will be issuable in the denomination of $5,000 or any integral
multiples thereof.
MATURITIES AND REDEMPTION
The Bonds will mature on February 1 in the following years and amounts:
Year Amount
2002 $700,000
2003 745,000
2004 800,000
2005 835,000
The Bonds will be subject to redemption and prepayment, at the option of the
City and in whole or in part, and if in part, in inverse order of maturities and
by lot assigned in proportion to their principal amount within any maturity, on
February 1, 1997, and any interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to the-
principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus accrued interest to the date of
redemption.
BOND REGISTRAR. TRANSFER AGENT AND PAYING AGENT
The City will select a suitable bank or trust company to act as Bond
Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying Agent for the Bonds (the Registrar). The
Bond Register will be kept, principal and interest will be paid to the registered
owner of each Bond and transfers of ownership will be effected by the Registrar.
The City will pay the charges of the Registrar. The City reserves the right to
remove the Registrar and appoint a successor.
INTEREST PAYMENT DATES. RATES
Interest will be payable each February 1 and August 1, commencing February'l,
1991. All Bonds of the same maturity must bear interest from date of issue until
paid at a single, uniform rate, not exceeding the rate specified for Bonds of any
subsequent maturity. Each rate must be expressed in an integral multiple of
5 /100th or 1 /8th of 1 %.
DELIVERY
The closing of the Bonds will occur prior to April 1, 1990. The original
purchaser must notify the Registrar at least 5 business days prior to the closing
of the Bonds of the persons in whose names the Bonds will be registered and the
authorized denominations of the Bonds to be originally issued. If notification is
not received by that date, the Bonds will be registered in the name of the
original purchaser and will be issued in denominations corresponding to the
principal maturities of the Bonds. On the day of closing, the City will furnish
to the purchaser the opinion of bond counsel hereinafter described and a
certificate verifying that no litigation in any manner questioning the validity of
the Bonds is then pending or, to the best knowledge of officers of the City,
threatened. Payment for the Bonds must be received by the City at its designated
depository on the date of closing in immediately available funds.
LEGAL OPINION
An opinion as to the validity of the Bonds and the exemption from taxation of
the interest thereon will be furnished by Dorsey b Whitney, of Minneapolis,
Minnesota. The legal opinion will be printed on the Bonds at the request of the
purchaser. The legal opinion will state that the Bonds are valid and binding
V
general obligations of the City enforceable in accordance with their terms, except
to the extent enforceability may be limited by State of Minnesota or United States
laws relating to bankruptcy, reorganization, moratorium or creditors' rights
generally.
QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS
The Bonds will be designated by the City as "Qualified Tax - Exempt
Obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as.amended.
TYPE OF BID AND AWARD
Sealed bids for not less than $3,030,000 and accrued interest on the
principal sum of $3,080,000 must be mailed or delivered to the undersigned and
must be received prior to the time stated above. Each bid must be unconditional
and must be accompanied by a cashier's check or certified check or bank draft in
the amount of $61,600, payable to the City Clerk. The good faith deposit will be
retained by the City as liquidated damages if the bid is accepted and -the bidder
fails to comply therewith. The bid authorizing the lowest net interest cost
(total interest on all Bonds from March 1, 1990 to their maturities, less any cash
premium or plus and discount) will be deemed the most favorable. In the event
that two or more bids state the lowest net interest cost, the sale of the Bonds
will be awarded by lot. No oral bid and no.bid of less than $3,030,000 for
principal, plus accrued interest on all of the Bonds, will be considered and the
City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive any nonsubstantive
informalities in any bid, and to adjourn the sale.
CUSIP NUMBERS
The City will assume no obligation'for the assignment or printing of CUSIP
numbers on the Bonds or for the correctness of any numbers printed thereon, but
will permit such numbers to be assigned and printed at the expense of the
purchaser, if the purchaser waives any extension of the time of delivery caused
thereby.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing
pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will
serve as a nearly -final Official Statement as required by Rule 15c2 -12 of the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda
specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds,
together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final
Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined
in Rule 15c2 -12. No more than seven business days after the date of the sale, it
shall provide without cost to the successful bidder 75 copies of the Official
Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. If the sale of the Bonds
is awarded to a syndicate, the City designates the senior managing underwriter of
the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of
distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each participating
underwriter. Any underwriter executing and delivering a bid form with respect to
the Bonds agrees thereby that if its bid is accepted by the City (i) it shall
accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship
with all participating underwriters of the Bonds for the purposes of assuring the
receipt by each such participating underwriter of the Final Official Statement.
Copies of the Official Statement, bid forms and any additional information
may be obtained from the undersigned or from Public Financial Systems, Inc., 512
Nicollet Mall, Suite 550, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, telephone: 612 - 333 -9177,
financial consultants to the City.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Marcella M. Daehn
City Clerk
Edina, Minnesota
4. Official Statement. The City Manager, in cooperation with Public
Financial Systems, Inc., financial consultants to the City, is hereby authorized
and directed to prepare on behalf of the City an official statement to be
I
distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds. Such official statement shall
contain the statement of Terms and Conditions of Sale set forth in paragraph 3
hereof and such other information as shall be deemed advisable and necessary to
adequately describe the City and the security for, and terms and conditions of,
the Bonds. The City Manager is authorized on behalf of the City to deem the
official statement near "final" as of its date, in accordance with Rule
15cl- 12(b)(1) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
5. Combination of Maturities. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
475.54, Subdivision 17, this Council estimates that the tax increments to be
pledged to the payment of the Bonds are sufficient to pay when due the principal
and interest on the Bonds.
Adopted by the City Council on March 5, 1990.
Attest:
Mayor
City Clerk
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Rice.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Resolution adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENT.TO 50TH Ig FRANCE REDEVELOPMENT PIAN SCHEDULED FOR
3 2/ 6/90 Assistant Manager Hughes advised that in accordance with the Council's
direction of February 20, 1990, staff has prepared an amendment to the 50th &
France Redevelopment Plan. The effect of the amendment is two -fold:
1. The amendment allows the use of tax increments to finance the public
improvement project-at 50th and France, which is estimated to be $3,000,000.
2. The amendment provides for the pooling of tax increments from 50th and
France into the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan area.
The proposed amendment was forwarded to the Hennepin'County Board of Commissioners
and the Board of Education for the Edina School District on February 23 in
compliance with state statute that-requires notification.
Assistant Manager Hughes pointed out that in order to meet the time schedule
required by statute, the Council would have to hold-a special meeting on March 26,
1990, to consider the plan amendment. He explained that it is important to
process the amendment prior to April 1, 1990 and staff would therefore recommend
that a special Council Meeting be held on March 26.
Member Rice asked if this is another step in the process but not the final one.
Assistant Manager Hughes said the Council would hold a public hearing to actually
approve the amendment. Once the amendment is approved the Council would at its
discretion implement the pooling.
Member Kelly asked, were the pooling needed, if it would be a separate action.
Assistant Manager Hughes said that it would be a separate action by the Council to
actually use 50th and France tax increment funds in the future to pay for
Centennial Lakes or Edinborough debt service.
Mayor Richards asked if staff has had any contact with legislators or Hennepin
County on'the subject of pooling tax increments. Assistant Manager Hughes said a
that he and City representatives had met with Representative Paul Ogren, House Tax
Committee Chair, on March 2. The.purpose was to discuss special legislation
concerning the homestead issue. At that meeting Representative Ogren inquired if
there was an opportunity for pooling other districts in the community and if that
was being considered. His feeling was that special aid to Edina would not be a
r.
popular topic in the Legislature and his thought was that as pooling is now
permitted it may be.the preferable method to seeking special legislation.
Following discussion as to the public hearing date, Member Paulus made a motion to
schedule a public hearing on March 26, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. to consider the Amendment
to the 50th and France Redevelopment Plan. Motion was seconded by Member Smith.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
Motion was made by Commissioner Kelly and was seconded by Commissioner Smith for
adjournment of the HRA. Motion carried unanimously.
Executive Director
City Clerk
J.
9ZN A. ?LIl
F- � ' gO
��•'N
iaea
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: HRA COMMISSIONERS
From: GORDON L. HUGHES
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Date: MARCH 19, 1990
Subject:
PRELIMINARY REPORT -
TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # HRA II.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
❑
To Council
Action ❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Provide comments and direction to staff concerning the proposed tax
increment financing plans. Schedule public hearing for April 2, 1990.
Info /Background:
In accordance with the Council's request, we have prepared draft plans
supporting the'..establishment of tax-increment financing districts at Valley
View Road and Wooddale Avenue, 44th Street and France Avenue and 70th
Street and Cahill Road. These preliminary plans have been prepared with
the assistance of the Hoisington Group, our planning consultant. J.Peter
Meyers has also assisted us in discussions with the business community.
These plans are in the draft stage and we would welcome your comments and
direction concerning them.
PLAN PREPARATION AND REVIEW PROCESS
Prior to commencing plan preparation, staff and our consultant met
individually with the 5 or 6 key business persons from each of the three
retail areas. The purpose of these meetings was to obtain their comments
and recommendations concerning the area and to determine if they had
particular plans relating to their businesses. Following these meetings
our consultants prepared preliminary land use and public improvement plans.
Report and Recommendation
March 19, 1990
Page Two
On February 27, 1990, staff and the consultant conducted an open meeting
with each of the three retail areas. At these meetings we presented our
preliminary plans and obtained any comments and recommendations from those
in attendance. It should be noted that these meetings were very well
attended by the business community. On February 28, 1990, the preliminary
plans were likewise presented to the Community Development and Planning
Commission for their informal review. Following these meetings, our
consultant revised and refined the land use plans which are included in
this packet of materials. At the same time, our staff has drafted the
narrative that will accompany the plans. These drafts are likewise
attached. Our legal counsel is presently in the process of preparing the
legal documents necessary for district establishment.
The purpose of the March 19, 1990, Council review, is to obtain your
comments and recommendations concerning the preliminary plans. We will
then be able to provide revisions to these plans prior to the April 2,
1990, hearing. Although the March 19th review is not a scheduled public
hearing, we have invited those individuals who were in attendance at the
February 27, 1990, meeting, as well as other individuals who have called to
inquire about our plans. We expect that some of these individuals would
like to offer comments to the Council. The Community Development and
Planning Commission will again review the proposed plans at their March 28,
1990, meeting, and we hope will pass a recommendation on to the Council for
your consideration on April 2, 1990.
STATUS OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING LEGISLATION
As you know, legislation adverse to tax increment financing has been
introduced in both houses of the legislature. Adoption of this legislation
would likely restrict our ability to create some or all of the three
proposed tax increment financing districts. Based on our understanding of
these bills, it would be important to establish these districts prior to
April 30, 1990, as this appears to be the proposed effective date of this
legislation.
PRELIMINARY PLANS
Although the effective date of pending tax increment legislation is April
30, 1990, it should be noted that certain portions of the proposed
legislation may affect districts that are created prior to April 30. In
particular, the legislation may affect our ability to amend existing tax
increment financing plans at a later date. Therefore, the proposed retail
plans provide for a wide range of public involvement based on the reasoning
that it may be difficult to expand the scope of these plans in the future.
For example, the plans provide for the possibility of public acquisition of
properties for redevelopment purposes, even though at a later date, the
City may elect not to participate in such acquisitions.
-fi
i
Report and Recommendation
March 19, 1990
Page Three
It is important to know that adoption of the tax increment financing plans
and districts does not commit the City to implement the plans.
Establishment of the districts provides the financial basis for future City
or HRA participation. Therefore, the plan should be viewed as schematic in
nature.
FINANCE PLANS
Finance plans will be incorporated into the legal documents presented on
April 2. As with the land use plans, we have included a wide range of
potential public expenditures including the possible public acquisition of
properties to facilitate development /redevelopment. Some of these possible
acquisitions include single family homes particularly at 44th and France.
Again, our strategy has been to include all possibilities recognizing that
legislation-may restrict our ability to expand plans in the future.
Our preliminary public cost budgets are provided in Exhibit A. At this
time, we have not attempted to determine if adequate tax increments will
exist to support such expenditures. In our view, such analyses are best
performed at the time specific projects are proposed.
SUMMARY
Staff is very anxious to receive your comments and direction concerning"
these draft plans. Your requested revisions can then be accommodated into
the plans which are presented for public hearing on April 2, 1990.
6 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES
VALLEY VIEV ROAD/900DDALE AVENUE
Estimated Capital and Administration Costs:
Estimated Costs
Property Acquisition $ 153,800
Demolition 40,000
Interest Assistance 100,000
Relocation 46,000
Public Improvements
(Streets & Parking) 190,000
Contingency (15 %) 79,500
Capitalized Interest 90,000
Administrative Costs 73.500
TOTAL $ 772,800
44TH & FRANCE
Estimated Capital and Administration Costs:
Estimated Costs
Property Acquisition $1,330,800
Demolition 200,000
Interest Assistance 175,000
Relocation 280,000
Public Improvements
(Parking, Utilities,
Landscape) 530,000
Contingency (15 %) 377,000
Capitalize Interest 432,750
Administrative Costs 340.000
TOTAL $3,665,550
70TH & CAHILL
Estimated Capital and Administration Costs:
Estimated Costs
Property Acquisition $ 529,400
Demolition 150,000
Interest Assistance 150,000
Relocation 160,000
Public Improvements
(Landscape, Street Vac.) 175,000
Historic Building Relocation 150,000
Contingency (15 %) 200,000
Capitalized Interest 226,050
Administrative Costs 190.000
TOTAL $1,930,450
w -- z
44TH AND FRANCE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
I. INVENTORY
The 44th and France area is a neighborhood scale Commercial District. The area
developed as "Downtown Morningside" in the 1930's at the intersection of the
France Avenue and 44th Street street car lines. Although some infill
development and redevelopment have occurred, the area has maintained its
original flavor.
The 44th and France Redevelopment Plan area is illustrated on Figure 1. The
area is generally bounded by 44th Street on the north, France Avenue on the
east, 46th Street on the south and, Eton Avenue extended on the west.
Functionally, the commercial district includes similar areas adjacent to France
Avenue in Minneapolis. This plan, however, does not include any property within
the City of Minneapolis.
A. IAND USE, ZONING
The Redevelopment Plan Area contains a variety of residential and
non - residential land uses. There are no vacant parcels within the Plan area.
Figure 2 lists all parcels within the Plan Area and describes the present land
use for each parcel.
1
T
�J ` I L
i
I
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
44TH AND FRANCE AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc
0 loo• zoo' Soo'
1=
.I
e,
.I
Oi
ul
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1 45th
Project Area and Tax Increment
Financing District Boundaries
1 46th
i
Figure 1
PLAN AREA
I f
l I I Existing Occupancy
_ 1. Durr Ltd.(Furniture)
M
r. ornin side Rd.
2. House (Vac)
❑ 3. House
0 1 1 r ❑ 11 ' I�1 4. House
I H I J ❑ i 1 5. House
❑ —H UU I 6. House
77 L-r p 1 7. Dental Office,Elves Mkting.
r i 3 i ; 8. Warehouse
_ 9. Senior Daycare
p. 5 4 2
i
❑ ❑ I 6 r� _ _ s, 10. Linhoff Photo
❑ � 11. Sports Collection/North Star Services
— P 0 : i i 12. Laser Ware
i ❑ ��► 4 65 9 1 P I I Health Foods
0 P �� . 1 Hmong Folk Art
QI 7 p i i
` P Bruegger's Bagel Bakery
P 1 i
/' 13. Hardware
' % P i 14. Convention Grill
P .\ 1 %� 15. Realty Office
16. Doctor's Office
LL 17. Dental Office
17 i 45th 18. Sheridan's Interiors
O 19. House
a
20. House
1 I 21. Edina Cleaners (2 Buildings)
P u V 22. Rapid Oil
23. Garage
�. 24. Office
0 �` ��SJ O • I!
25. Office
P 26. House
3 27. House
28. House
1J
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
44TH AND FRANCE AVE.
L
Hoisington Group Inc.
0 100 200 300
P = Parking Areas
Utilities
I_____ Storm Sewer
46th - - - Sanitary Sewer
Water
- - Overhead Power Lines
owns• Protect Area
9—XX31 Average Daily Traffic1987 (ADT)
Figure 2
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Redevelopment Plan Area is anchored by the retail uses on France Avenue.
Non - residential buildings along West 44th Street and Sunnyside Road are
primarily office uses.
B. NATURAL FEATURES
The character of the Plan Area is that of an urban, neighborhood scale retail
district. All of the parcels have been developed, and as such, there are no
unaltered areas remaining. However, portions of certain developed parcels
contain steep slopes and low areas which provide ponding areas and open space.
C UTILITIES
Some properties within the Plan Area receive water from Minneapolis. Electric
utilities are above ground throughout the Plan Area.
D. PARKING - CIRCUTATION - TRAFFIC
France Avenue, a County Road, is designated as a minor arterial roadway and
carries approximately 13,000 vehicles trips per day. West 44th Street is a
collector Street and carries about 5,000 vehicle trips per day. Sunnyside Road
is a local street. France Avenue was reconstructed in 1989.
Parking for office and retail uses is provided in private parking lots and
public on- street parking. There are no parking structures or off - street
publicly owned parking lots in the Plan Area. The amount of off street parking
in the area does not comply with current zoning requirements for off - street
4
s 1,
parking. Although there does not appear to be a shortage of parking, convenient
parking is lacking for many businesses in the central part of the Plan Area.
E. EXISTING PLANS
The City of Edina's Comprehensive Plan, originally adopted in 1981, contains the
following policies relating to northeast Edina and 44th and France in
particular:
* Maintain and encourage neighborhood retail commercial nodes at
Valley View - Wooddale and 44th and France.
* Encourage the intensification of existing commercial uses at 44th and
France provided that suitable parking provisions can be accommodated.
* Discourage extensions of Commercial uses along France Avenue, Sunnyside
Road and 44th Street.
* Encourage the redevelopment of obsolete or vacant commercial properties
and service stations on the periphery of 44th and France for multiple
residential housing.
II. PROBL EK ASSESSMENT
3
A. BUILDING CONDITION.
Most buildings in the Redevelopment Plan Area were constructed in the 1930's and
1940's. Although most buildings remain structurally sound, a significant
percentage suffer from structural and life - safety code problems requiring
substantial renovation or complete redevelopment. Others require lesser
investments or cosmetic improvements to ensure their continued viability.
Building condition is included in Figure 3, Analysis of Existing Conditions.
B. LAND USE RELATIONSHIPS
Much of the charm of 44th and France is its eclectic and somewhat haphazard
development pattern. However, this development pattern has created some
problems. First, the commercial area is not clearly defined. This has resulted
in the conversion of some single family homes to non - residential uses. It has
also resulted in disinvestment in single family homes because they are isolated
from other single family homes and relate only to non - residential uses. The
lack of a clear definition of the retail center and the lack of transitional
buffers is a blighting influence on single family homes nearby.
The Edina Cleaners is located at the corner of France Avenue and Sunnyside Road,
near the center of the retail district. In addition to its original structure
the cleaners occupies what was originally the Westgate Theatre. In addition to
its retail function Edina Cleaners operates a large -scale dry cleaning plant.
This industrial use is inappropriate in a neighborhood scale retail center.
4
Morning ide Rd. ; I
❑! o' ❑ 0 --
- ❑ a p MF i
El .F jl
li n r_ Parking Deficiency
❑ u end se Conflict R '
I���I+ I Low Building To Land Ratio
❑ j 4 (Some Substandard Housing
❑ .o, ❑ S t. Commercial On Street Parking
W El �,.. agth P Unsightly Power Lines
❑ �_ _
/
Nice Building Facade; Preserve Image
— Parking Deficiency
— Key Intersection
Need To Architecturally Link Two
Sides Of Street And Create a Retail
District Focus
Alley; Poor Site Lines
Substandard Buildings (2)
I
Parking Deficiency
Steep Slopes
J
— Inappropriate Land Use (Garage)
o
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
44TH AND FRANCE AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc.
0 100 200• 300 ' /
a
Substandard Structure
1
j —
1
1 Substandard House
I
Modest; Well Maintained Homes
i
I 46th
'I� Legend:
i
S.F. Single Family
M.F. Multi Family
O Office
R Retail
I Industrial
Figure 3
ANALYSIS
Parcels south of the Edina Cleaners contain inappropriate and obsolete land
uses. The building conditions range from substandard to fairly good. Two
single family homes, one used for office space, are substandard and should be
razed. The uses do not relate well to each other or to other nearby residential
areas.
The central portion of the business district is served by a relatively large
surface parking area accessed from several curb cuts along Sunnyside Road. The
shared parking area is owned by a number of property owners, primarily those
fronting on Sunnyside Road. Poor access, grade differentials, and no
organization of the spaces and drive aisles makes this very inefficient parking.
The central portion of the district contains a variety of retail and office use
which are compatible. However, the offices uses along 44th Street do have a
adverse effect on residential properties on the north side of 44th Street. This
has resulted in a lack of maintenance and reinvestment resulting in substandard
buildings.
III. REDERELOPNEENT PLAN
(Figure 4 - Redevelopment Plan; Figure 5 - Public Improvements Plan)
A. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Revitalize and concentrate the focus of the 44th and France retail area without
disturbing the historical character or function of the area.
5
a
II i
Rd. a l
00 0
.I
0 i
F I i
I
I
Low To 1
tdium Density Retail
amily Housing
Sl• I
1
gglt► Re 1
C/ ■ 1
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
44TH AND FRANCE AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc. .=-L-2
0 100 200 300
1:7
■UNN" Project Area
Figure 4
REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN
Morningside
El
El 0 11 10 10
N
X
�P""M,dium TDOensity
P101",
I
I
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
E Oro
Retail
Street Improvements
Undergrounding of
Re Electric Utilities
-Parking Lot Improvements
i f
` Entry Feature
I 45th
Retail
Landscaping
tf ez
461h
rProject Area
44TH AND FRANCE AVE.
Hoisington Group inc-
0 100 200' 300'
Figure 5
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
PLAN
Emphasize the historical roots of old Morningside Town Center.
Encourage participation by all groups or agencies affected by the Redevelopment
Plan, including, but not limited to property owners, tenants, City of
Minneapolis, and the Edina City Council.
Improve the transition from the Commercial area to the surrounding single family
neighborhood through buffering techniques and by the redevelopment of
inappropriate and incompatible uses.
Implement Design guidelines to address appropriate building design, scale,
materials, signage and street scape landscaping for the area.
Intensify the retail mass to improve the drawing power and ensure the continued
viability of the area as a neighborhood scale retail district.
Redevelopment projects should reflect the historical character of Morningside
Town Center.
Encourage and assist private redevelopment consistent with the Redevelopment
Plan which would not otherwise happen through:
* Land Acquisition
* Demolition /Clearance
* Site Assembly
* Land Write Downs
* Interest Assistance
31
* Relocation
* Public Improvements
Reduce conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles.
B. REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
The Redevelopment Plan Project encompasses both public and private property.
Elements of individual projects are outlined below.
1. Public Improvements
a
It is the intent of this project to correct problems with public streets
sidewalks and other public and private utility systems throughout the
Redevelopment Plan Area. The public improvements project includes the following
activities:
* Property Acquisition to provide public parking in the central portion
of the Plan Area.
* Placing existing overhead utilities underground.
* Reconstruction of existing parking areas.
* Public Street improvements.
* Pedestrian /sidewalk improvements.
* Landscaping - streetscape improvements.
* Providing identification of the Morningside Town Center
7
In addition to the public improvements throughout the Plan Area, the
Redevelopment Plan illustrates several other redevelopment projects. In order
to achieve the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority expects to participate in the redevelopment activities.
Public activities which may be included in each project may include:
* Property Acquisition.
* Clearance and site assembly and site preparation.
* Relocation.
* Land sales to private redevelopers.
* Vacation of public rights of way.
* Land write down
* Interest Assistance
2. Residential Redevelopment
The redevelopment project area is located north of 44th Street and west of
France Avenue. The project includes what is presently four single family homes.
The property faces office buildings and surface parking lots on the south side
of 44th street. This land use conflict, the current underutilization of land,
and the substandard condition of some of the buildings, and the fact that 44th
Street is a collector street suggest multi - family as a more appropriate use of
the property. The Redevelopment Plan illustrates redevelopment of the
properties with low to medium density residential development. The
redevelopment site could support between 10 and 16 dwelling units.
8
. ' . r
3. Eavansion of Existine Businesses
The Redevelopment Plan anticipates expansion potential for businesses in several
areas. The first area is at the northwest corner of France Avenue and West 44th
Street. The project would accommodate a small expansion of the existing
antique /furniture store and provide additional off - street parking. The second
area of expansion would be for the first two buildings south of the intersection
of 44th Street on France Avenue. The third area includes the four small office
buildings on Sunnyside Road. The expansion may involve the renovation and
expansion of individual buildings or it may include the redevelopment of some or
all properties. Although public involvement may be required it is expected that
most activities will be privately facilitated.
4. Retail Redevelopment
The redevelopment includes what is presently the complex of buildings used by
Edina Cleaners, a automotive service center, and a vehicle storage garage. The
redevelopment also includes two residential properties immediately west of the
Edina cleaners site fronting on Sunnyside Road. The Redevelopment Plan
illustrates 15,000 to 20,000 square feet of retail space and off - street parking.
The redevelopment will be the focus of Morningside Town Center. It is expected
that the redeveloped retail center will mimic the existing retail development
north of Sunnyside, preserving the store front character of the area.
5. Office Redevelopment
6
The redevelopment project includes three single family homes in the southerly
portion of the Plan Area. The project could be expanded by adding the two most
southerly parcels in the Plan Area.
Two of the homes have converted to office use and three remain single family
residences. The Redevelopment Plan anticipates a redevelopment of all five
parcels, with an office building containing 6,000 to 8,000 square feet of floor
area.
10
. •'y 1
a
70TH STREET AND CAHILL ROAD DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SUMMARY
The 70th Street and Cahill Road Plan Area is a diverse mix of residential,
commercial and industrial uses. The area developed primarily between 1950 and
1975.
Problems in the Plan Area are generally related to a lack of vitality and unity
in purpose (land use, market appeal, tenant mix and image), and physical
development (architecture, traffic circulation, identification, site grading and
landscaping).
Despite these shortcomings, the Plan Area enjoys a good location. It has the
potential to serve the southwest Edina area and be an asset to the entire
community. Such success is possible through the incorporation of the proposed
Development Plan which, in general, seeks to improve the compatibility of land
uses and upgrade the physical environment to contemporary user standards.
Specific details about the Plan Area and Development Plan are contained in the
following pages. The Contents are as follows:
INVENTORY
1.
Location
2.
Existing Land Use
3.
Natural Features
4.
Utilities
5.
Traffic Circulation
6.
Existing Plans
PROBLEM ASSESSMENT
1. Land Use
2. Physical Development
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
1. Goals and Objectives
2. Land Use
3. Physical Development
4. Relocation
5. Development Projects
* Public Improvements
* Residential Project
* Retail Project
1
I.
INVENTORY
PART 1 - LOCATION
The Plan Area is illustrated on Figure 1. The specific area for consideration
is bounded by 70th Street to the north, the railroad right -of -way to the east,
the northern boundary (from east to west) of the Gabberts building, Village
Drive Extended and the City of Edina park open space property to the south, and
the rear lot lines of the single family homes fronting on Lanham Lane and Lee
Valley Circle to the west. Existing conditions within the Plan Area are shown
on Figure 2.
PART 2 - EXISTING LAND USE
Land use in the Plan Area covers a full spectrum of uses. Five zoning districts
are spread across the 17 parcels in the Plan Area. Eight land owners control
the 11 buildings which accommodate approximately 25 business entities.
The zoning districts and their associated uses are as follows:
1. R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District
Associated Land Use Plan Designation: Single Family Residential and
2
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
70TH AND CAHILL AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc.
0 100 zoo• 300
Figure 1
PLAN AREA
Area and Tax Increment
ng District Boundaries
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
70TH AND CAHILL AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc.
0 100 - 200 300
Figure 2
Existing Occupancy
1. Old Cahill School Site
2. Vacant
3. Wooddale Aced.
4. Office /Retall (Vacant)
5. Union 76
6. Con
7. City Of Edina Sand Storage
8. Heads & Threads
Olympic Electric
Patton Ind.
Braemar Printing
9. Flowers of Edina
Children's Barbers
Hairdresser
Drugstore
10. American Legion
Dominoes
Clean N Press
11. Kenny's Market
We Restaurant
12. Edina Highpolnt
13. Highlander Apt$.
14. Oak Olen Townhomes
15. Vacant
16. Jesco
kres Boundary
EXISTING CONDITIONS
P= Parking Areas
Utilities
_____ Storm Sewer
••.... Sanitary Sewer
Water
xxxx Average Dally Traffic 1987
(ADT)
A
i
Low Density Attached Residential
* 5 Parcels
* 1 Building
* Private reuse of a former Edina school building for a
Montessori School and offices.
2. HPD, Heritage Preservation District (Overlay R -1)
Associated Land Use Plan Designation: Low Density Attached Residential
* 1 Parcel
* 1 Building
* Formerly St. Patricks Church, circa 1925, now
used by a community theater group.
3. PC -2, Planned Commercial District
Associated Land Use Plan Designation: Commercial
* 4 Parcels
* 4 Buildings
* Multi- tenant neighborhood scale retail uses. One building is
currently vacant.
4. PC -4, Planned Commercial District
Associated Land Use Plan Designation: Commercial
* 1 Parcel
3
t
* Building
* Automobile service station
5. PID, Planned Industrial District
Associated Land Use Plan Designation: Industrial
* 6 Parcels
* 4 Buildings
* Light industrial uses including processing and storage
facilities.
PART 3 - NATURAL FEATURES
The Plan Area comprises approximately 27 acres. The Plan Area is essentially
completely developed, however, land to building ratios are relatively high
particularly west of Cahill Road. Open space in this area is comprised of woods
and steep slopes. Steep slopes are also present east of Cahill Road, east of
the commercial area and east of the 7075 Amundson building. There is also a
grade separation which divides the commercial land east of Cahill into north and
south components.
The Plan Area is a part of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. Drainage
from the area flows to the south along Cahill Road and east along West 70th
Street.
PART 4 - UTILITIES
4
All private utilities, except natural gas, are routed above ground.
PART 5 - TRAFFIC CIRCULATION
Within the Plan Area is the intersection of Cahill Road and West 70th Street.
Both Cahill Road and 70th Street are classified as Collector streets. Vehicles
counts on Cahill are at 8000 per day and at 70th Street are at 9700 east of
Cahill, and 6350 west of Cahill. Cahill Road was constructed as an industrial
road with a nine ton capacity. Amundson Road, to the east of Cahill Road is
classified as a local street.
Sidewalks in the Plan Area are along the west side of Cahill Road and west of
Cahill Road along the south side of 70th Street. There are no sidewalks east of
Cahill Road around commercial or industrial properties.
Parking in the Plan Area is contained in private lots. There has not been a
shortage of parking at any of the buildings in the Plan Area.
9
EXISTING PLANS
The Plan Area has been discussed in part in the Edina Comprehensive Plan which
was adopted in 1981. A land use designation amendment in early 1990 included
land within the Plan Area.
Of the four neighborhood commercial areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan,
the retail area in this Plan Area was the only neighborhood center in which
major land use changes or redevelopment was not anticipated. The Comprehensive
Plan did say, however, that the City should encourage the provision of
establishments at the retail area which better serves the shopping needs of the
area.
PROBLEM ASSESSMENT
Deficiencies within the Project Area are classified in two categories:
1. Land Use
2. Physical Development
Figure 3 provides a graphic analysis of the deficiencies.
LAND USE DEFICIENCIES
C:
Proposed S.F.
78th St. W.
Propos d M.F.
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
70TH AND CAHILL AVE.
�Holsington Group Inc
0 100 zoo 300
.onl
R
N
Amundson
I
—t
I I Ind.
Fol
City
=Sand Storage
Ind.
Figure 3
ANALYSIS
Unattractive Building
Retail Center
. Buildings are Disconnected
. Lacks Unified Orientation
• Lacks Proper Fit With Market
Area
. General Lack of Evergreen And
Shrub Plantings
Access To Shopping Center
Is Awkward And Unclear
CUnsightly NSP Plant
Center Building Is on Slope;
Rear Of Building Faces Cahill Rd.
Difficult To Lease
Amundson Ave. No Longer
Needed Due To The Vacation
Of Amundson Ave. West of Cahill Rd.
Edge
Legend:
S.F. Single Family
M.F. Multiple Family
R Retail
Ind. Industrial
��/�� Steep Slopes
,
In general, the broad land use categories, (i.e. residential, commercial,
industrial) are appropriate as designated in the 1980 Land Use Plan and amended
in 1990. As currently utilized, however, the following land use problems exist:
1. Land Use Relationships. The transition between
single family residential uses and higher intensity uses
could be improved.
2. Underutilized Parcels. Parcels in the Plan Area are of
adequate size to accommodate reasonable development. As
currently developed, however, land to building ratios are
high and buildings are located in a manner which prevents
infill development. The following specific problems exist:
a) The former Edina School building which is now a
Montessori School and offices is on a 10 acre site.
The building occupies approximately 11% of the site
area and is located in the center of the site.
b) The Old St. Patrick Church occupies approximately
3% of its two acre site. Heritage Preservation
District zoning applies to the entire two acre site.
c) The Commercial area between Amundson and Cahill Road
is 5.8 acres and measures 750 feet in length north to
south. The existing buildings at the site occupy less
than 20% of the site.
7
Additional development is limited, however, because the five existing
buildings are detached and sprinkled across the site. Additions to
buildings or connecting existing buildings are virtually impossible because
of the distance between buildings, grade differences and location of
parking areas.
3. UNDERSERVED MARKET AREA
The uses and businesses in the Plan Area have potential to serve the residents
in the vicinity and employees of the adjoining industrial area. However, no
action has been taken to encourage the provision of uses which better serve the
shopping needs of the area as suggested in the Comprehensive Plan. Vacancies in
the retail area remain and customer traffic light.
PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT DEFICIENCIES
In addition to land use deficiencies, the physical development in the Plan Area
is substandard as described below:
1. Architecture
* The retail buildings are not aesthetically pleasing which
discourage customer traffic;
* The retail building are disconnected;
* The retail buildings do not meet current user needs for interior
spaces, product display, entries, storage, and tenant mix;
* The Montessori School is designed for a limited use and
E:
adaptive reuse is difficult because of the type of construction,
existing interior spaces and presence of asbestos.
* Visual access from the street to buildings is limited.
2. Traffic Circulation
* Amundson Avenue is no longer necessary since the vacation
of Amundson Avenue west of Cahill Road. It is used as a
short cut to Cahill and alternative entry to 7075 and 7101 -7113
Amundson.
* Access to the retail area is unclear and awkward.
* Parking within the retail area is disjointed. Dead end parking
aisles exist as well as parking on slopes.
* Accommodations for pedestrian traffic do not exist east of
Cahill Road.
3. Identification
* Area markers do not exist which establish an image for the Plan
Area.
* Individual uses lack entrance designed to direct and inform
customers;
* Sign package at the retail area lacks unity and is in disrepair.
Sign panels have been painted over or replaced with plywood;
The historical site is not identified and does not have an
interpretive description to inform visitors;
VJ
4. Site Grading
* Steep slopes fragment the plan area;
* regrading is necessary to improve building pads, parking areas
and egress landings;
5. Landscaping
* Perimeter landscaping is minimal and does not add to the
streetscape.
* Screening and buffering of parking, and drive aisles do not exist
as the Zoning Ordinance requires;
* Ornamental landscaping designed to improve the appearance
and image of buildings is non - existent.
10
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
(Figures 4 & 5 - Development Plans; Figures 6 & 7 - Public Improvement Plans)
The Previous Plan Area Inventory and Problem Assessment support the conclusion
that development activities are necessary in the Plan Area. The identified
problems have not and cannot be corrected by private enterprise or regulation
alone. In order to correct problems identified herein and to achieve
development in the Plan Area in a timely manner, and in conformance with the
Land Use Plan, a tax increment plan should be established and certain tax
increment projects undertaken.
Based upon the need demonstrated in the inventory and problem assessment, the
following goals and objectives are established for the 70th and Cahill
Development Plan Area:
1. Develop a retail environment that meets contemporary standards
for design and satisfies the retail needs of the neighborhood.
2. Create opportunities for new businesses to locate in the plan
area that respond to current market demands.
3. Eliminate blighting influences and incompatible and functionally
obsolete buildings that impede development potential.
11
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
70TH AND CAHILL AVE.
Ho sington Croup Inc. 0 100 200' 300'
Figure 4
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
'ALTERNATE A'
i AFS a BounduY
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
70TH AND CAHILL AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc
o 100 - 200 300
Figure 5
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
'ALTERNATE B'
Area Boundary
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
70TH AND CAHILL AVE.
HoWngton Group Inc
0 100, 200 300
i Area Boundary
Figure 6
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
'ALTERNATE A'
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
70TH AND CAHILL AVE.
Hotsl Won Group Inc
o loo' 700' 700•
Figure 7
Area Boundary
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
'ALTERNATE B'
4. Assemble parcels of land capable of meeting contemporary retail
development standards and needs.
5. Provide maximum opportunity for redevelopment by private
enterprise.
6. Improve compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood.
7. Improve land use transition in the plan area and promote
development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
8. Improve the quality, image and appearance of the plan area.
9. Improve identification of the plan area and its various components.
10. Provide opportunities which designate the historical significance of
the plan area.
Land Use
Land Use related components of the Development Plan emphasize elimination of
uses inconsistent with the Land Use Plan designations, and encourage appropriate
redevelopment particularly west of Cahill Road. In addition, redevelopment of
functionally obsolete buildings is anticipated, particularly in the retail
portion of the Plan Area. Reestablishment of an appropriate portion of the Plan
Area as a historical feature is also anticipated.
12
Development and redevelopment should be principally accomplished privately in a
manner consistent with the needs of the surrounding neighborhood and city as a
whole. Public acquisition for development is to be kept to a minimum.
In some cases, public acquisition, clearance and parcel assembly may be the only
efficient and expedient approach to desired development. This may be the case
in the retail portion of the Plan Area.
Physical Development
Physical development components of the Development Plan emphasize the upgrading
of site and building features to meet contemporary user standards. All
development, redevelopment and roadway alterations should address the following
standards:
* Improved directional signage and business identification;
* Improved tenant spaces.
* Improved site grading.
* Improved access and egress features.
* Screening and buffering of incompatible uses.
* Improved perimeter and boulevard landscaping.
* Existing above ground utilities should be placed underground
whenever possible in connection with development, redevelopment
and street alterations.
Relocation
13
It is the intent of the H.R.A. that current owners of properties designated for
redevelopment be party to efforts to redevelop their properties. If some or all
of the owners of the subject property are unwilling or unable to redevelop their
property and the H.R.A. must acquire and dispose of the property, the H.R.A.
will comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, and all
applicable Minnesota State Statutes. The H.R.A. will provide staff for on -site
relocation counseling for tenants and information on their rights relative to
relocation services and payments.
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
The Development Plan illustrates a number of projects in the Plan Area. The
projects encompass both public and private property. Elements of individual
project are outlined below.
Public Improvements
It is the intent of this project to eliminate unnecessary streets, improve
sidewalks and other public and private utility systems and to designate the
historical significance of the Plan Area. The Public improvements project may
include the following activities:
* Vacation of all or part of Amundson Avenue
* Utility relocation associated with above vacation.
14
. 9 A
* Landscaping /streetscape improvements
* Pedestrian /sidewalk improvements
* Placing overhead utilities underground
* Relocation of school building and site preparation
* Interpretive/historical kiosk
* Grading and screening of City property
Residential Project
The intent of this project is to encourage development consistent with the land
use designations of the Land Use Plan as amended in 1990. The project area is
west of Cahill Road and south of 70th Street. Development may include single
family residential are to the far west of possibly 13 homes; and, as many as 21
attached dwellings on the east portion of the project area.
Retail Project
More than any other component of the Development Plan, the Retail Project is
sensitive to immediate service area needs. It is the intent of the Retail
Project to upgrade and /or create facilities which meet current user demands. In
addition, a high priority of the project is to encourage the establishment of
businesses which better serve the market area.
The direction of the project is dependent on market conditions in the area.
Prior to public involvement in the retail project a detailed, current, retail
15
market analysis and feasibility study which may be necessary to determining,
among other things, the following:
* The overall market size
* The percentage of overall market the site attracts
* The potential lease rate per s.f.
* The types of retail activities which can be expected
to locate in the area
* The potential sales volume of each prospective tenant
* What amenities should be provided.
It is anticipated that the retail project may take one of two possible
directions.
Alternative A
Alternative A involves the complete development of the commercial area. The
Plan calls for the elimination of the five buildings in the existing Commercial
area plus the 7075 Amundson building and the construction of two new buildings
totaling 66000 square feet. A greater number of tenants is also anticipated
including potentially upscale convenience retailers. Public activities may
include those in Alternative B as well as the following:
* Soil correction and preparation
* Street vacation
* Land acquisition
* Relocation of individuals and businesses
16
.
* Land writedowns
* Low interest loans
* Sale of land to private developer
Alternative B
Alternative B involves the refurbishing of the existing commercial area. Retail
floor areas and tenant users will not change significantly. Public activities
may include the following:
* Interest assistance for rehabilitation
* Pedestrian /sidewalk improvements
* Landscaping /streetscape improvements
* Entrance /egress improvements
* Clearance and demolition
* Identification and directional signage
17
t
WOODDALE AND VALLEY VIEV ROAD DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The Wooddale and Valley View Road Plan Area is primarily a neighborhood scale
Commercial Area. The area developed in the late 1950's and early 1960's. There
has been some redevelopment in the area, however, the area has maintained its
original flavor.
Deficiencies in the area are primarily related to serious traffic and parking
problems. In addition, there exists at least one significant inappropriate use
and some incompatibility between residential and commercial uses.
Physical development in the Plan Area is now outdated and is now gradually
deteriorating and is in need of upgrading to contemporary standards.
In spite of these deficiencies, the area has remained viable and currently
enjoys full occupancy. Improvements are needed, however, to correct hazardous
traffic conditions and to reverse the gradual decline of the Plan Area. This is
possible through the implementation of the proposed Development Plan.
1
INVENTORY
Location
The Plan Area is illustrated on Figure 1. In general, the area included the
tracts adjacent on the north side of Valley View Road from the Valley View
Center west of Wooddale Avenue, extending to Oaklawn Avenue. The existing
conditions within the Plan Area are illustrated on Figure 2.
Land Use
The Plan Area is currently zoned appropriately for Commercial uses and Parking
facilities. The Edina Land Use Plan, originally adopted in 1981, designates the
area from the Valley View Center west to Kellogg Avenue as Commercial, and the
area between Kellogg and Oaklawn.as High Density Residential.
Natural Features
The Plan Area is completely developed with urban, neighborhood retail features.
The parcels are generally shallow, north to south. Slopes and ponding areas are
not present in the area except adjacent to Valley View Road west of Wooddale.
Utilities
All private utilities, except natural gas, are above ground.
Parking - Circulation - Traffic
2
1
0
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
WOODDALE AND VALLEYVIEW AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc S��o. zoo aoo
id.
Project Area and
Tax Increment Financing
District Boundaries
Figure 1
PLAN. AREA
Existing Occupancy
1. Best Reflections Hair Styling
2. Great Clips
3. Sport Shop, Baskin Robbins
4. Conoco Gas Station /U -Hall
5. Valley View Drugstore
6. S.W. Clinic
7. Mobil Gas Station
8. Valley View Center
0 v
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
WOODDALE AND VALLEYVIEW AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc.
o' z goT
--1)
Area Boundary
P = Parking. Areas
Utilities
- - - -- Storm Sewer
-- — Sanitary Sewer
Water
- — - Overhead Power Lines
® Average Daily Traffic 1987(ADT)
Figure 2
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
0
V
Valley View and Wooddale are both classified as collector streets. Vehicle
counts on Valley View are 7900 east of Wooddale and 4700 West of Wooddale.
Vehicle counts on Wooddale are 3300. Kellogg and Oaklawn are local streets.
Parking conditions vary throughout the Plan Area. To, the west of Wooddale at
the Valley View Center a surplus of parking exists. East of Wooddale, however,
all uses have insufficient parking. Often cars are double parked or parked onto
the City right -of -way. Parking lots are privately owned and some sharing does
occur.
Circulation within the area is difficult, particularly at the intersections of
Kellogg and Valley View Road and Wooddale and Valley View Road. In.many
instances there is not separation between sidewalk and street and /or parking and
street. Numerous large access /egress points also exist in the Plan Area.
Existing Plans
The City of Edina's Comprehensive Plan identifies the Plan Area as a
neighborhood retail facility. Although specific objectives for the area are not
contained in the Comprehensive Plan, it does infer that the area is older and in
a "state of transition and major land use changes should be expected for such an
area."
PROBLEM ASSESSMENT
3
I
Problems within the Plan Area are classified in three categories as follows:
1. Traffic Circulation
2. Land Use
3. Physical Development
Figure 3 provides an analysis of the problem area.
Traffic Circulation Deficiencies
The most serious problem in the Plan Area is the pattern and interaction of
traffic. Several hazardous situations exist as described below:
1. Disorderly intersection at Kellogg and Valley View Road.
Several wide driveways and unimproved access points. There
is no separation between the parking area and the street.
Haphazard truck storage at the Conoco Station disrupts
visibility at the intersection.
2. No parking /street separation between Valley View Road and
the SW Clinic.
3. No separation between parking and sidewalk south and west
of the clinic. -
4. Multiple curb cuts throughout the Plan Area.
4
11111.
General Problem List
• Broad Expanses of Pavement; No Greenspace
• Poor Signage; No Continuity of Architecture
• Too Many Driveways; Too Wide and Undefined
• Disorganized Parking Areas
• Lack of Commercial District Identity
• Limited Expansion Potential
All
LL
Entry peature
Slope; Potential for
Landscaping
Rehabilitation Needed
Paved Over Boulevards
Disorganized Parking
Street Widening Ne
R S.F
O Commercial/Residential
Incompatibility /Conflicts
—62nd.
M.F.
Pot ntial Entry Feature
Parking Cars Double Parked
Shortage
Disorganized Intersection;
Wide Driveways
Lacks Separation Between Street and Parking
nsightly Structure /Outdoor Equipment Storage
Unsightly Overhead Power Lines Legend:
Serious Pedestrian/ Vehicular SF Single Family
Conflicts. Lacks Separation Between MF Multi- Family
Street and Parking O Office
R Retail
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
WOODDALE AND VALLEYVIEW AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc,
O'2 Boa•
Figure 3
ANALYSIS
it
.•
WMI
• ■
■ O�7,
MEN
�■�■
i ■�
Ilan
■ .
.
Entry peature
Slope; Potential for
Landscaping
Rehabilitation Needed
Paved Over Boulevards
Disorganized Parking
Street Widening Ne
R S.F
O Commercial/Residential
Incompatibility /Conflicts
—62nd.
M.F.
Pot ntial Entry Feature
Parking Cars Double Parked
Shortage
Disorganized Intersection;
Wide Driveways
Lacks Separation Between Street and Parking
nsightly Structure /Outdoor Equipment Storage
Unsightly Overhead Power Lines Legend:
Serious Pedestrian/ Vehicular SF Single Family
Conflicts. Lacks Separation Between MF Multi- Family
Street and Parking O Office
R Retail
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
WOODDALE AND VALLEYVIEW AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc,
O'2 Boa•
Figure 3
ANALYSIS
I
* Seven openings between Valley View
Road and 61st Street on Wooddale.
* Five openings in addition to street
intersections along Valley View Road.
Other traffic related problems in the Plan Area are less hazardous, but equally
disruptive to the vitality of the area. In general, parking areas are
disorganized and directional signage does not exist. -East of Wooddale parking
is also deficient. Through out the Plan Area there exists an overabundance of
pavement leading to inconsistent and confusing parking patterns in the lots, and
poor circulation patterns for both vehicles and pedestrians.
Land Use Deficiencies
0
In general, the Commercial uses in the Plan Area are spread out and extend into
the area designated as High Density Residential on the Land Use Plan.
Within the Commercial area, activities at the Conoco Station are inappropriate
and do not conform to the Zoning Ordinance requirements. The following
activities, among others, are non - conforming.
k Use of the site for small engine repair.
Use of the site as a equipment /vehicle rental facility.
* Outdoor storage of merchandise and equipment.
* Outdoor storage of commercial vehicles.
5
Land use conflicts also exist between the commercial area and the adjacent
residential properties to the north, particularly east of Kellogg.
Physical Development Deficiencies
Development in the area was prior to current zoning standards and is
non - conforming in terms of setbacks and greenspace. Much of the existing
asphalt could be better utilized as greenspace buffers. The identification of
the area is poor, as well as signage for individual uses. Architecture of the
buildings lacks continuity and also is outdated. Overhead utility lines are
unsightly.
DEVELOPMENT PIAN
(Figure 4 - Development Plan; Figure 5 - Public Improvements Plan)
I. GOAIS AND OBJECTIVES
Eliminate blighting influences, functionally obsolete land uses which
impede orderly development within the district.
Promote the growth and vitality of existing businesses.
Encourage and promote private redevelopment and revitalization of the
district.
D
L•
Project Area
Legend:
R Retail
O Office
2F 2 Family Residential
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
WOODDALE AND VALLEYVIEW AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc
o• z goo•/
Figure 4
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN
L�
Street -
Improvements
0
Undergrounding of
Electric Utilities
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
WOODDALE AND VALLEYVIEW AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc-
o z aoo j
0
Figure 5
Street
Vacation
Entry
Feature
—62nd.
Q-1
PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS
PLAN
MUM
Street -
Improvements
0
Undergrounding of
Electric Utilities
CITY OF EDINA
PROJECT AREA PLANS
WOODDALE AND VALLEYVIEW AVE.
Hoisington Group Inc-
o z aoo j
0
Figure 5
Street
Vacation
Entry
Feature
—62nd.
Q-1
PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS
PLAN
k Increase the supply of off - street parking sufficient to meet present and
future demand.
* Correct existing parking and circulation problems and eliminate
vehicular - pedestrian conflicts.
Create opportunities for new neighborhood scale retail commercial
businesses in the district.
Improve the image of the commercial district and improve its transition to
adjacent residential.
Improve the streetscape image of the area by undergrounding existing
overhead utilities and by providing landscaped boulevard areas.
* Improve access to the area and traffic flow through the area.
Encourage and assist private redevelopment consistent with the Development
Plan through:
* Land Acquisition
* Relocation
* Demolition and Clearance
* Land Scale to Private Developers
* Interest Assistance
* Improvement of Public Rights -of -Way
II. DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
Although much of the activity anticipated by the Development Plan will be
privately financed, certain public activities may be required to achieve the
goals and objectives of the Plan. These activities may include:
* Land Acquisition
* Relocation
* Clearance and Demolition
* Site Assembly
* Sale of Property to Private Developers
* Interest Assistance
* Vacation of Public Easements
* Land Write Downs
* Public Improvements Including Landscaping and Street
Lighting
A. Public Improvements
The public improvements project includes activities intended to correct
non - conforming conditions in the boulevard area and to correct parking
and circulation problems in the district. The project will provide an
identity for the commercial area as well as improving the appearance of
the area by providing landscaped boulevards and `parking areas. Replacing
above ground utilities with underground utilities is also included in
the public improvements project.
D
The public improvements project will occur throughout the district and
will include the following activities:
* Placing Overhead Utilities Underground
* Landscaping Public Space
* Street Lighting
* Vacation of Public Easements
* Roadways and Street Circulation Improvements
* Storm Sewer Improvements
* Pedestrian Circulation and Sidewalk Improvements
B. Clinic, Drug Store, Conoco
This project would remove the Conoco Station and replace it with off - street
parking for the Clinic /Drug Store building and for the Sports Shop /Baskin
Robbins building. It would also provide parking for an expansion of the
Clinic and Drug Store. Kellogg Avenue would no longer'connect to Valley
View Road, which will help isolate the residential area from the commercial
district. The additional parking provided will allow the elimination of
the non - conforming and hazardous parking along the east and south side of
the Clinic and Drug Store. These areas as well as other areas along the
perimeter of the development would be landscaped and screened.
C. Valley View Center
The Development Plan an addition of approximately 6,000 square feet to the
southwest end of the existing center. The site is under utilized and
6
present parking supply would accommodate the additional floor space. The
Development Plan anticipates remodeling and upgrading of the present center
concurrent with the expansion.
10
tl
its, �N A !�\
o e � V1
lase
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: HRA COMMISSIONERS
From: GORDON L. HUGHES
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Date: MARCH 19, 1990
Subject: EXTENSION OF RESOLUTION
- ACQUISITION OF KUNZ OIL/
LEWIS ENGINEERING PROPERTIES°
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #
HRA
III.
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr. Recommends
7
To HRA
❑
To Council
Action
❑
Motion
0
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Extend Resolution authorizing acquisition of Kunz Oil and Lewis Engineering
until August 1, 1990.
Info /Background:
On October 2, 1989, the HRA adopted the attached Resolution concerning the
acquisition of Kunz Oil and Lewis Engineering. This Resolution was valid
and effective only until December 31, 1989. The Resolution was further
conditioned that acquisition could not occur until the HRA had received a
signed and delivered redevelopment agreement for the property. On December
18, 1989, the HRA extended the Resolution until March 30, 1990.
On March 15, 1990, staff received a proposal for tax increment financing
assistance from Jerry's Enterprises, Inc., and Opus Corporation regarding
the subject property. No other proposals have been received to date.
Based upon our estimate of the time needed to process the proposal for tax
increment assistance as well as a rezoning of the property, I would
recommend extension of the resolution until August 1, 1990.
Mn
cITY OF
4801 WEST 50TH STREET. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424
612 - 927 -8861
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, it is necessary, advisable, and in the public interest that the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota (the "HRA "), a body politic and
corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, acquire for redevelopment
purposes, and pursuant to the redevelopment plan entitled "Grandview Area
Redevelopment Plan" dated May 30, 1984, adopted by the HRA on June 18, 1984, and
approved by the City Council of the City of Edina on June 18, 1984, property
within the Grandview redevelopment area; and
WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the purposes set out in said Plan, it is necessary
that the properties described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part
be redeveloped; and
WHEREAS, the HRA has been advised that said property will not be made available
for redevelopment unless it is acquired by eminent domain; and
WHEREAS, by reason of the inability of any private party to purchase said property
for redevelopment, it will be necessary to procure the same by the right of
eminent domain.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the HRA proceed to procure the property
described on Exhibit A hereto under its right of eminent domain if it is not made
available for redevelopment by sale to a private party or parties; and that the
attorneys for the HRA be instructed and directed to file the necessary petition
therefor and to prosecute such action to a successful conclusion, or until it is
abandoned, dismissed or terminated by the HRA or by the Court; and that the
attorneys for the HRA, the Director and Executive Director of the HRA and the
Chairman and Secretary of the HRA do all things necessary to be done in the
commencement, prosecution and successful termination of such eminent domain
proceeding.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that none of the foregoing actions to acquire the property
described on Exhibit A hereto be started or undertaken until the HRA has signed
and delivered a contract for redevelopment of said property, and the School
District Property north of Eden Avenue, with a redeveloper, and on terms and
conditions, acceptable to the HRA, and until the Tax Increment Financing Plan is
amended in accordance with Minnesota Statute 469.175, subd.(4).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that none of the foregoing resolutions shall be effective
or valid after December 31, 1989.
EXHIBIT A
Lot 1, Block 1, Wanner Addition, EXCEPT that part described as follows: Beginning
at the Southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence North along the East line of said
Lot 1, a distance of 23.4 feet; thence West parallel with the South line of said
Lot 1 a distance of 101 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of said Lot
1, a distance of 22.4 feet; thence West parallel with the South line of said Lot 1
to the West line of said Lot 1; thence South along the West line of said Lot 1 a
distance of 1 foot to the Southwest corner of said Lot 1; thence East along the
South line of said Lot 1 to the point of beginning.
and
Lot 1, Block 1, "Edenmoor, Hennepin County, Minnesota ", EXCEPT the South six (6)
feet thereof.
and
That part of Government Lot 8, Section 28, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of
the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Southerly of the South line of Eden Avenue,
Westerly of the West right of way line of the Minneapolis Northfield and Southern
Railway and Easterly of Block 1, Wanner Addition, EXCEPT that part described as
follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of Lot 2, Block 1, Wanner Addition;
thence North a distance of 25 feet; thence West a distance of 90 feet to the East
line of Lot 1, Block 1, Wanner Addition; thence South a distance of 25 feet to the
Southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence East a distance of 90 feet to the point of
beginning.
Also,
Lot 2, Block 1, Wanner Addition, according to the map or plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County,
subject to an easement for roadway purposes over and across the South 25 feet of
said Lot 2, and together with an easement for roadway purposes over and across the
North 25 feet of Lot 3, Block 1 of said Wanner Addition; also together with an
easement for road purposes over a strip of land 16 feet in width being 8 feet on
each side of the following described line: Commencing at a point on the south
line of Eden Prairie Road 358 feet due East from the West line of said Government
Lot 8; thence South and parallel with the west line of said Government Lot 8 to a
point which is 612.9 feet North of the South line of said Lot 8; thence west at
right angles to east line of premises first above described.
That part of Lot 1, Block 1 of said Wanner Addition described as follows:
Beg-inning at the Southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence North along the East line
of said Lot 1, a distance of 23.4 feet; thence West parallel with the South line
of said Lot 1 a distance of 101 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of
said Lot 1, a distance of 22.4 feet; thence West parallel with the South line of
said Lot 1 to the West line of said Lot 1; thence South along the West line of
said Lot 1 a distance of 1 foot to the Southwest corner of said Lot 1; thence East
along the South line of said Lot 1 to the point of beginning.
That part of Government Lot 8, Section 28, Township 117 North, Range 21 West,
Hennepin County, Minnesota,, described as follows: Beginning at a point located on
a line drawn between the following described points; Point 1 located on a line
parallel with and distant 221.8 feet East of the West line of said Government Lot
8, which point is distant South 259.4 feet from the Intersection of the center
line of Eden Prairie Road and said line; and Point 2 located on the South line of
said Government Lot 8, 246.8 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Government
Lot 8; said point of beginning being 647.9 feet from the South line of said
Government Lot 8; thence Northerly along said drawn line 25 feet; thence Easterly
and at right angles a distance of 90 feet; thence Southerly and parallel with said
drawn line 25 feet; thence Westerly and at right angles to point of beginning.
ADOPTED this 2nd 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 is a true and correct
copy of the resolution duly adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Edina, Minnesota, at its meeting of October 2, 1989 and as recorded in the Minutes
of said meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 19th day of October, 1989.
City Clerk
o a.
O
v �
\ VCORPOF�`1�v/
1888
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, Camp Fite, the nati.onaZ youth organization celebrated .tta 80th
bi thday on Match 17, 1990, and
WHEREAS, Camp Fite councib .teach boys and g.ct b sePi- reti.ance and good
- - -citizenship;. and
WHEREAS, through contemporaty programa and by epeahi.ng out on izzuea
that a66ect youth and theiA 6am.it ia, today's Camp Fite iz heeping hcds
cope with the.it changing woad; and
WHEREAS, in Camp Fite, the choicea and oppotttunitia ate wide open jot
boys and gittz; and
WHEREAS, -through Camp Fate, young peopte cute teaming to deveeop confidence
and to gain sFiiU -s needed to become tommorow's teade 6; and
WHEREAS, Camp Fite -us commended Got the opponttuniti.es .i to programs o66et
to young people in the City o6 Edina and throughout the nation and 6or
the many services these young people perform 6or theiA communiti.ez
through Camp Fite;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Fredehi.ch S. Richards, Mayon o6 the City o6. Edina, do
hereby proc2a•im Match 19 to Match 23, 1990, to be
CAMP FIRE BIRTHDAY WEEK
in the City o6 Edina.
ADOPTED tkis 19th day of March, 1990.
►ticv�
ayor
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL .
FEBRUARY 5, 1990
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor
Richards.
25,000 CHECK PRESENTED FROM'NINE -MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT Helen McClelland,
Manager of the Nine -Mile Creek Watershed District, presented the City with a
$25,000 check towards expenses incurred for damages during the July 1987
rainstorm. She explained that in 1977 there were no funds available to assist the
cities within the district. Since that time a maintenance and repair fund has
been established to assist cities. Ms. McClelland commented that it is very
positive working with the City of Edina who is environmentally conscious to enact
some flood storage and recreation programs. The Board believes these programs
mitigated a lot of damage that could have occurred in the 1987 storm. This
partnership has been an amicable and productive partnership for more than 25
_._ years, and--they hoped it would continue.- Mayor Richards - commented that the - -
Nine -Mile Creek Watershed District was very instrumental in the development of
Bredesen Park, the Braemar area and the County Road 18 floodplain area. On behalf
of the City of Edina, he extended thanks to the Nine -Mile Creek Watershed District
Board.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Notion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by
Member Rice to approve and adopt the consent agenda items as presented with the
exception of the removal of.items VII.B. &•C. - 3.2 Beer On -Sale License - Edina
American Legion and Appointment of Assistant Weed Inspector'.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 1940 APPROVED Motion vas made by
Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting of January 22, 1990.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
DECISION OF BOARD OF APPEALS UPHELD: LOT COVERAGE VARIANCE FOR LOT 6 BLOCK 1
PARKWOOD KNOLLS 17TH ADDITION (6620 FIELD WAY) DENIED Planner Phil Dommer
presented the appeal of Sather Companies to the Board of Appeals decision of
December 7, 1989 for denial of a lot coverage variance for Lot 6, Block 1,
Parkwood Knolls 17th Addition. He explained that the Zoning Ordinance permits
buildings to cover up to 25% of the area of the lot. In this case, the owners
desired to cover the limit plus an additional 2.5 %. The entire addition accounts
for approximately 860 square feet. Approximately 486 square feet is permitted
within the ordinance; therefore, 376 square feet or 2.5% is in excess of what the
ordinance allows. The Board of Appeals reviewed the variance request, heard
testimony, and unanimously recommended denial.
Steve Sather, Sather Companies, 7920 Powell Road, Minneapolis, spoke on behalf of
the proponents, Stephen and Julie Dannewits. He offered blueprints of the project
to Council Members and staff. Mr. Sather said that the project is a seasonal
garden room type addition, technically not heated, with deck area on three sides.
The room addition and a portion of the deck does meet the intent of the Ordinance.
A portion of the deck does go beyond the intent of the ordinance . He pointed out
that behind the garage there is a concrete area that that they wish to remove and
replace and upgrade it with a paver patio on- grade. Mr. Sather presented a
document signed by surrounding neighbors stating they understand what the project
is and have no objection. Mr. Sather said he and the proponents understand that
the ordinance is in place so that lots are not overbuilt. But in this case we are
looking at patio area. The question was raised at the Board of Appeals meeting
whether the patio area could be excluded or the plans modified. He argued that
the addition is designed to be an outdoor room. Their desire is to have a room
that is open and all glass to enjoy the setting. In so doing, as with all patio
door walls, the project must be decked on all sides. Also, they are trying to
make the room flow well. The addition meets all the setback requirements, and
they feel that given that it a patio area, the deck area that is over the lot
coverage isn't an obtrusive structure. It is enhancing the property and those
around it, and is being done with high quality materials. They do not feel that
the spirit of the ordinance in looking at 2.5% is not an unusually large request.
Mr. Sather said they feel the function of the Board of Appeals is to look at a
situation that is reasonable and find a way to make it work. He said he was aware
of some of the recent problems that the City has had with some decisions on
granting variances and he would hope those would not impact this situation.
Member Smith questioned the dimensions that would be within lot coverage. Planner
Dommer said that both the 256 square foot addition.and a 228 square foot deck are
permitted within the ordinance.
Member Paulus asked about the percentage of people who complete projects and at a
later date add on a deck without a permit and questioned whether this is a case
where a homeowner is being punished because they are being up front. Planner
Dommer responded that there are no statistics on such projects but that it does
happen. He said it is the homeowner's obligation to meet the ordinance
requirements. Member Paulus referred to the staff report statement that "lot
coverage variances have been consistently denied by the Board on large lots since
1984 when the ordinance was last reviewed." She asked if that statement is
intended that, because of the consistency, if the Council votes in favor of this
it would start an inconsistency. Planner Dommer said he believed that variances
by their nature are reviewed on an individual basis, but our history has been that
large lots do not have unique circumstances to warrant a variance. Member Paulus
inquired about the safety aspect of this proposed project requiring a deck.
Planner Dommer stated that an indoor railing could be installed for the floor to
ceiling glass and therefore no deck on the outside would be needed. Member Paulus
commented that she had a real problem with this case. If we uphold the letter of
the law, we deny the variance. However, she believed that the homeowner was being
honest and responsible.
Member Smith commented that, hopefully, homeowners are forthcoming with their
project plans. He said that looking at the plans for the proposed addition he
felt that the deck could be redesigned to get the project done. Mr. Sather stated
that the project could be built with a deck that conforms to the allowed lot
coverage by simply running a catwalk around the structure. That would serve a
functional purpose but would not accomplish the openness and flow of the project
down to the patio area.
Member Smith moved to uphold the decision of the Board of Appeals to deny the the
2.5% lot coverage variance for Lot 6, Block 1, Parkwood Knolls 17th Addition. A
second to the motion was made by Member Rice.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Rice, Smith, Richards
Nays: Paulus
Motion carried.
NO ACTION TAKEN ON REQUEST TO REALIDCATE SPECIAL ASSESSICMS ON VERNON COURT
PROPERTY Steve Wilson, Schaefer Development and Construction Ltd., St. Cloud, MN,
said he was here to discuss a proposal on property in Edina owned by Robert
Hanson. Proposals for the development of the property have been before the
Council several times; one for a 15 -unit townhouse development in 1987 and the
other for a five lot split to be developed into 10 twin homes. Neither of those
proposals were brought to fruition by the developers and it is a piece of property
that has been troublesome. Mr. Wilson recalled that in 1983 there was a request
by Mr. Hanson to improve the property with the installation of• utilities and the
construction of Vernon Court. Along with that the property took back a large
special assessment levied specifically against his property since the benefit.was
only being derived by one side of the roadway. Because of the fact that the
specials were levied against only one side of the road and the fact that, in his
opinion, they were put in prematurely prior to a development that did have a good
chance of success, Mr. Wilson said the amount of the assessment now is
considerable and is in excess of $200,000.
Mr. Wilson proposed'a plan with regard to the special assessments that would take
the one lump- special assessment, which-in a typical platting process would have to
be paid off in the platting, and spread it out over the 12 lots so that as the
lots then develop the special assessment would be paid (1 /12th at a time). The
rationale would be that it has been a troubled property, payments have not.been
coming back to the City, the City is currently owed a large sum of money for those
specials and this solution would allow the property to be developed, marketed, and
the City paid back the moneys expended to date. Mr. Wilson said his request was
not for formal consideration but for Council to authorize and direct the staff to
enter into discussions with Schaefer Development and him over the allocation of
the assessments and how they would be spread over the lots and to come up.with an
agreement that could be presented to the Council for formal action.
Member Paulus asked Attorney Erickson if the assessments were to be put on the 12
lots rather than the one parcel would it be just for this particular project or
would it stand this way for the remaining years. Attorney Erickson stated that,
as he understood the proposal, the $200,000 would be allocated 1/12 over each of
the lots and the assessments would be paid as they are developed, presumably when
the City grants a building permit. If a permit is not issued, presumably then the
assessments would be payable over an agreed upon short assessment period. A
similar situation would be when new developments come on -line where we have
development contracts for public improvements which are then assessed and payable
in 1 -3 years. If they are not paid by virtue of the development, they are paid
then on the annual 1 -3 year installment basis. Member Paulus asked Mr. Wilson if
if he was still looking for no time restrictions but wanted it open -ended on the
lots. Mr. Wilson stated that was correct. Attorney Erickson said his
recommendation to the City would be to not have this open- ended, but to have a
payment schedule included like normal assessments are handled and if not paid the
land goes-forfeit. Mr. Wilson stated that if it comes to the point of creating a
a definite timeline by which the specials need to be paid he would like to at
least have that as an option in the negotiations. He added if they need to be
paid in one year he would have trouble with that, but if it could be extended to a
3 - 5 year period of time that would be negotiable.
Mayor Richards commented that he would not support the proposal and would urge
that staff not be given direction to negotiate. There has been a time honored
process as to how property is developed in the City and this would give
recognition in effect to a zero lot line proposal. He said he felt this is.
premature and the process seems to have worked in the past. If this property is a
difficult piece of property to develop, there must be a reason but that does not
make it the City's problem. He said he felt the City should not do anything that
would lose our flexibility to collect the $200,000.
Member Kelly said she was generally in agreement. She asked how long the property
has been in default and when the City would take over the property. Planner
Dommer said he believed it has been in default since 1983. Attorney Erickson
stated that the property has gone delinquent, the prior owner bought it back on a
repurchase contract with Hennepin County and that is now delinquent. The
procedure would be for the County, if it continues to be delinquent, to cancel the
repurchase contract. It would then be owned by the County and available for sale
to other parties. If the property is resold the City should get all or some of
the special assessments back. Attorney Erickson explained that the County
processes any failure and also processes the options of property owners to
repurchase it and pay again. That process is going on now and eventually if not
paid it will become tax - forfeited . at which time it will come before the Council as
to disposition (e.g. acquire for public purpose, etc.)
Mayor Richards said that if the development is to go forward the City's procedures
must be followed and that presumably Mr. Wilson has a sense of where the Council
stands on the property. No formal action was taken.
*HEARING DATE OF 2/20/90 SET FOR PLANNING MATTERS Motion was made by Member Smith
and was seconded by Member Rice to set February 20, 1990, as hearing date for the
following Planning matters:
1) Preliminary Rezoning - R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to R -2 Double
Dwelling Unit District - Lots 1, 2, and 3. Block 2, Smisek Addition
2) Lot Division - Lots 1, 2, and.3, Block 2, Smisek Addition
3) Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan - Single Family Residential to Low Density
Attached Residential - Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 2, Smisek Addition.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
FIRST READING GRANTED FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1221 -A2. MODIFYING REOUIREMENTS OF MEMBERS
TO THE PARR BOARD Mayor Richards explained that at the January 22, 1990, Council
Meeting, the Council approved the Park Board's recommendation to eliminate the
requirement that a Planning Commission member serve on the Park Board and that a
resident of the community be appointed instead.. Under the direction of the
Council, Attorney Erickson has drafted an amendment and if adopted, a resident
will need to be appointed to the Park Board to replace the Planning Commission
member position.
Member Smith introduced Ordinance No. 1221 -A2 for First Reading as presented and
on file in the office of the City Clerk. Motion for First Reading was seconded by
Member Kelly.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
First Reading Granted.
*BID AWARDED FOR SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION REMODELING Motion was made by Member
Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for remodeling of Lift
Station #9 located on Warden Avenue to recommended low bidder, Orr Construction,
at $64,700.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR PUMP AND WELL RENOVATION Motion was made by Member Smith and was
seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for the renovation of Wells #8, #12, #16
to recommended low bidder, Layne Minnesota, at $22,692.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR STREET SWEEPER Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded
by Member Rice for award of bid for the purchase'of a street sweeper to
recommended low bidder, Boyum Equipment, Inc., for $83,472.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR WATER TREATMENT PLANT REPAIR Motion was made by Member Smith and
was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for repairing Water Treatment Plant
#4 to recommended low bidder, Flo- Covery Systems, in the amount of $14,083.41.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
(Member Kelly left the meeting during discussion of the following agenda item.)
SODTHDALE POLICE OFFICER DISCUSSION HELD, DECISION TABLED TO 2120190 MEETING
Manager Rosland stated that the matter of a Southdale police officer had been
discussed before the Council on two previous occasions. The first was
introduction of Southdale's proposal for hiring of a police officer that would be
assigned to Southdale to assist them with their policing responsibilities. As
directed by the Council, staff had prepared a report regarding private funding of
a,public safety service but it was the Council's decision- -not to hire a police
officer to be assigned to the Southdale area.
Manager Rosland said he would like to plead a slight case from his management
position and also from a policing point of view. He submitted the following:
1) Southdale could be policed stronger and it would allow for some of the present
officer time to be utilized on the street or in other areas. 2) Concern for the
health and welfare of police officers. Currently it is possible that officers are
relegated to squad cars for 20 -30 years. The hope would be to move officers in
and out of squad cars for 6 months or a year so they would have opportunities to
work in other areas, such as the drug officer who is appointed for about a year.
The attempt would be to keep the police force active and avoid burnout especially
in the older officers that are responding mainly to medical cases, etc.
David Hendy, Manager of Southdale.Center, observed that Southdale has grown
dramatically, with increased parking.ramps, number of stores, and tremendous
growth around the area at the Galleria, Centennial Lakes, and the hospital ramps.
There.is now a need for an Edina police officer to handle the increase that is
coming with the growth in the area. He made these observations: 1) The Southdale
security officers could do a much better job, and 2) We need 'to look at the safety
of the people who shop at Southdale, many of whom are Edina residents, in an
effort to continue their comfort level. Mr. Hendy stated that Southdale Center is
willing to fund $35,000 /year for an officer that would help the public, the
security officers and also support the Edina police force.
Member Rice asked for a brief review of past discussions and asked who would have
control of the officer. Chief Swanson referred to the executive summary of his
staff report provided at the November 6, 1989 meeting. The recommendations
included continued analysis and negotiation with the Center Companies and to
encourage their considering funding two officers. In lieu of that, Southdale
could hire parttime officers to provide police visibility. The question revolved
around privatizing the service. For years we have tried to privatize by having
the non - governmental agency do that particular service. In this proposal the
Police Department would be doing this service; however, it would be funded by
private industry. The problems that could occur such as supervision, mentioned in
the study, could be overcome. The management of the officer is a more .
philosophical question if it is funded that way or not. Control of the officer
would under the Edina Police Department. Chief Swanson stated that he supported
the comments made by the City Manager in terms of having alternatives to place the
officers in, making it a healthy environment.
Member Smith questioned what the burden costs would be besides salary, and squad
car and recalled that it would be approximately $60,000.00 per officer per shift.
Chief Swanson responded that $60,000 is close. Minimum salaries have been raised
since the $35,000 figure was calculated at a $23,000 base salary plus a 30% factor
for benefits. The central services support, meaning automobiles, liability
insurance, etc., could be absorbed by the current Police Department budget. The
Department would be able to assign an additional person and provide equipment for
that person on a day to day basis without further costs. Member Smith also raised
the issue of how far the City can go in carrying out requests of this type for
services and should we be in mall areas. Chief Swanson said critics could raise
the issue regarding whether a neighborhood could come in and ask for the same
service as long as they could fund it:
Member Paulus asked if Southdale holds the highest amount of crime for any
geographical area in Edina. Chief Swanson answered that it was tenfold. She also
asked if the City were to enter into this agreement with Southdale would there be
a time limit? Manager Rosland said Chief Swanson and he had agreed that if it did
not work the service would not be extended beyond such time as a retirement took
place so in reality there would not be an extra officer on the police force.
Member Paulus also asked why the patrol established in the 1970's for Southdale
was eliminated. Chief Swanson explained that it was eliminated by the City of
Edina because it had become difficult to supervise that entity. Also, the concept
was different than the current proposal. Although it was an efficient service, it
was deterring from the Police Department's ability for rapid response to other
parts of the City. The decision was then made to remove the unit from Southdale
and respond to Southdale the same as for the 50th & France and Grandview areas.
Manager Rosland commented that a similar precedence is at the 50th and France
commercial area where a City employee performs all the maintenance and the City
bills them for that service through a yearly assessment.
Member Rice asked Mr. Hendy if he had a clear understanding of what would happen
if this plan was implemented and that the Southdale officer would be under the
direction of the Edina Police Department and not the Southdale security staff. Mr.
Hendy stated that if the Police Chief ordered the officer while on duty to the
Galleria or the hospital or other Southdale areas that would be thoroughly
understood. Mr. Hendy said there have been many instances of criminal activity on
Southdale property where the Southdale security officers could not pursue because
they are not allowed to leave the property. A police officer could continue to
pursue off the Southdale property which would be an advantage. Member Rice
commented that the Manager's recommendation and Chief Swanson's response that
crime is tenfold at Southdale are persuasive, along with it being open -ended and
the officer being under the Police Department's control, and that it may be worth
a try again.
Member Smith inquired whether this would be considered a duty station? Chief
Swanson said not all the job details have been worked out. Generally speaking
there would be need for that person to have contact here regarding paper work,
etc. The majority of the hours worked would be in and about Southdale.
Member Paulus asked if we would be inundated with other similar requests, e.g. a
paramedic at 7500 York, etc. She expressed concern that we could get heavy on
staff because groups can come up with the funding and want a person hired.
Mayor Richards commented that the job of local government is to provide
traditional services to the residents. He said he was concerned that this would
move us away from the Council setting the policy for the City. Also, that two
issues are being confused: 1) Hiring a police officer for Southdale and 2)
Management of officers in responding to the Southdale area. He indicated he would
not support the proposal just because someone is offering funding.
After further discussion, Mayor Richards said this is an important issue that
needs further reflection because of the implications and questions that have been
raised. He suggested that it be continued to the February 20, 1990 agenda for
action.
Craig Weisman, security.supervisor at Southdale, commented that he has been at
Southdale for eight years and that he needed help however it can be worked out.
(Member Kelly rejoined the meeting at this point on the Agenda.)
ON -SALE BEER LICENSE FOR EDINA AMERICAN LEGION APPROVED Manager Rosland recalled
that_the_Edina American Legion has relocated to 7070 - Amundson Avenue.--According
to ordinance requirements, licenses cannot be transferred. The American Legion
has made application for a 3.2 on -sale beer license at their new location, the
Police Department has reviewed the application and approval was recommended.
Member Smith said he had asked this to be removed from the consent agenda. He
noted that in the Council packet was a letter from the Bassinger School of Music
announcing their move to Amundson Avenue. He voiced some concern about the beer
license being issued in the same area as the school. Member Smith asked if TJ's
restaurant have a beer license. City Clerk Daehn said they did and mentioned that
the grocery store in the same area has an off -sale beer license.
Motion was made by Member Rice for approval of issuance of a 3.2 on -sale beer
license to the Edina American Legion at 7070 Amundson Avenue. Motion was seconded
by Member Paulus.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Nays: Smith
Motion carried.
APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANT WEED INSPECTOR DISCUSSED. CONTINUED TO 2/20/90 Manager
Rosland explained that Hennepin County has advised that the Assistant Weed
Inspector for the City of Edina should be appointed prior to March 1, 1990. Dr.
Eugene Davis has served as assistant weed inspector for the City for many years
and is again interested in being appointed.
Member Smith said he had asked this to be removed from the consent agenda because
he had questions about what this person does, what he is paid, and what are the
costs. Manager Rosland explained.that the assistant weed inspector checks for
property that is in violation of the ordinance concerning weeds and height of
grasses and responds to complaints from residents. He is paid generally through
the assessment process. Park & Recreation Director Kojetin said the annual
compensation for this position is between $5,000 -6,000 and is a contracted
employee without benefits.
Mayor Richards commented that weed inspection is a program that is mandated by the
legislature to the cities without the necessary financial backup. Member Smith
inquired whether it could be folded into another job within the City and not
expand the role of employees. Manager Rosland stated that there would be no time
in the summer to handle this job with regular employees.
Mayor Richards directed staff to bring back a report on all aspects of the
assistant weed inspector's position to the meeting of February 20, 1990. No
formal action was taken.
ACTION ON TAX FORFEITED LAND CONTINUED TO 2/20/90 Bob Kojetin, Director of Park &
Recreation, informed the Council that a staff committee had studied the six
parcels on the Hennepin County List 741 -NC of tax forfeited land. Per state
statue the City can request any of the following: 1) Approve the parcel(s) for
public auction, or 2) Approve the parcel(s) for adjacent owner auction, or 3)
Request conveyance to the City for public use without.monetary consideration, or
4) Request that certain parcels be withheld from public auction for one year.
The committee recommended that the City acquire the following four parcels:
1. Acquire property for park purposes adjacent to Pamela Park -
ID #19- 028 -24 -42 -0122, Reason: Contiguous to Pamela Park
2. Acquire access off of Dewey Hill Road - ID #08- 116 -21 -32 -0066, Reason: To give
access to the flood control area and access to lake.
3. Acquire corner property off of Dewey Hill Road and Delaney Blvd. -
ID #08- 116- .21 -42 -0215, Reason: For "open space.
4. Acquire triangle on Northwood and Dundee Road - ID #29- 117 -21 -34 -0046, Reason:
.Majority of triangles are owned by the City and presently maintain the
property.
The committee recommended that the following two parcels be approved for adjacent
owner auction:
5. Grove Street and Arbor Avenue - ID #32- 117 -21 -31 -0003
Reason: Restrict sale to the adjacent land owners who are.presently
maintaining property.
Mayor Richards asked if the adjacent properties could come in and request a
subdivision if the parcel were attached to either of the adjacent properties.
Also whether the City could request the county to place a restriction on the
adjacent properties that they could not apply for subdivision of their property if
they acquired the tax forfeit parcel. Attorney Erickson said it is unlikely that
the county would agree to do that.
6. Delaney Boulevard adjacent to Dewey Hill Condominiums - ID #08- 116 -21 -42 -0214
a) Request a restricted sale to adjoining owners only (i.e. three adjoining
condominium associations - Dewey Hill East, Pondwood and Windwood. The
County would appraise the property and establish a minimum bid.
Alternatives:
b) Allow sale on the open market.
c) Acquire for park purposes. City would be required to pay outstanding
special assessments.
d) Acquire for park purposes provided that adjoining condominiums pay all
costs.
Director Kojetin said that this is a large piece of property on which there are
unpaid special assessments of approximately $155,000.00. Engineer Hoffman
explained that the specials are for Delaney Boulevard and the storm water district
in the southwest area of the City. The specials were levied evenly over the Dewey
Hill Estates development.
Mayor Richards asked if the developer has relinquished their development rights by
letting this parcel go tax forfeit. Assistant Manager Hughes commented that the
development plan (approved 41 units) and the zoning for this site will stay in
place regardless of the tax status. Mayor Richards questioned whether anyone who
picks up that can come in and put in 41 units and the least they will pay for that
is the $155,000 of specials against that property. Assistant Manager Hughes said
that his understanding of the process is that the county does an appraisal and
would offer it at a minimum to adjoining owners or whomever with a minimum
appraised value in mind that attempts to reflect market. Attorney Erickson
mentioned that if the county sets-a price on it that is less than the City
special assessments the net proceeds of the sale is allocated out among the taxing
authorities and the City would not recover the specials. Mayor Richards asked
when this forfeiture had to be acted upon. Clerk Daehn stated that the notice
came out in early December and that the Council would need�to take action within
90 days.
City Assessor Johnson clarified that the original special assessments were
approximately $64,000. The total delinquency including all the interest,
penalties, - taxes and special payments is.$126,000 with a balance payable -of $6,200
and a tax bill with another estimated installment of specials of $22,000 for 1990.
Of the approximate $155,000 the specials with interest on this property are
approximately 40% of the total. He added that, in the first public sale on a-
parcel like this, generally the county does not come in with a minimum bid of an
amount less than what is going against it. This sometimes results in a no sale
and then the property will go in a for sale book that you can walk in and buy it
across the counter. Typically it still does not sell and will probably will be
offered at a later date where we could force the sale and wind up with something
less. Special assessments have first call on any proceeds so that the taxes,
interest and penalties would come in inferior to the special assessments.
Mayor Richards then posed the following question. If the City were to acquire it
for legitimate public purposes such as open space, and the purpose would change
legitimately in say two, three or five years time, i.e. in the judgement of the
Council it no longer serves that public purpose, would the City be free to do what
it wants with that property. Attorney Erickson opined that if the City acquired
it for a public purpose and later decided it is no longer needed for that public
purpose the City would have to turn it back to the state or they would take it
from us by forfeiture. It will then go on and follow the sale process that has
been outlined. Assessor Johnson said that another thing that could happen would
be repurchase by the owner.
Following further discussion on parcels #5 and #6, Member Paulus made a motion to
refer parcels #5 and #6 back to staff for further information and recommendation
as to options and moved adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that the City Attorney be
authorized and directed to file "Application by Governmental Subdivision for
Conveyance of Tag Forfeited Lands ", for the following described properties
contained in Hennepin County Auditor's List "741 -NC ", said properties to be used
by the City as hereafter set forth:
Property ID 08- 116 -21 -32 -0066 - Open space and access to flood control area
and lake.
Property ID 08- 116 -21 -42 -0215 - Open space and water retention area.
Property ID 29- 117 -21 -34 -0046 - Open space.
Property ID 19- 028 -24 -42 -0122 - Public park.
ADOPTED this 5th day of February 1990.
Member Smith made a second to the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Resolution adopted.
*PETITION FOR SIDEWALK - VEST 42ND STREET BETWEEN OAKDALE STREET AND FRANCE AVENUE
REFERRED TO ENGINEERING Motion was made by Member Smith with a second by Member
Rice to refer the petition for a sidewalk on Vest 42nd Street between Oakdale
Street and France Avenue to the Engineering Department for processing.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
LETTER RECEIVED REGARDING TELECASTING OF SENATE SESSIONS - Mayor Richards reported
that he had received a letter from Jon D. Brune, Promotions Coordinator for the,
State of Minnesota Senate, with information regarding the telecasting of Senate
floor sessions and committee hearings, live on Regional Cable Channel 6.
DISCUSSION HELD REGARDING ORDINANCE NO. 102 (LIMITING TERMS OF BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS) Member Rice commented that since the last meeting he had thought
about and had done some research on the reasons for the adoption of Ordinance No.
102 Limiting the Terms of Service to Boards and Commissions which was to take
effect January 1, 1990. In retrospect it was adopted: 1) To promote the exchange
of ideas, new people, new experiences and new concerns. He said his personal
experience while serving on the Park Board was that what he thought were new ideas
had been tried several times before and that new concerns really were not new.
2) To demonstrate an openness of government in Edina, and 3) To insure that no
individuals become dominate for more than 12 years.
The other side of the ledger is that it is important to maintain leadership. The
vast majority of the people that are appointed to the boards and commissions are
excellent and some of them are extraordinary. Member Rice pointed out that some
of the boards and commissions are very specific and need focused people with
specialized interest and knowledge. Also, in the rare instance where there is an
individual whose continued service to a board or commission would not be in the
best interests of the City in the judgement of the Council, the Council has the
authority to do something about that situation.
Member Rice concluded by noting that the summary of turnovers on the boards and
commissions indicated that in the last three years about 34% have been new
members. He said he felt that is a sufficient number to insure new people, new
ideas, new experiences and new concerns. He expressed overriding appreciation for
three or four extraordinary individuals serving on boards and commissions and said
he was concerned that the Council would be losing that leadership and experience.
Member Rice then made a motion to consider on February 20, 1990, an amendment to
Ordinance No. 102 which would remove the 12 year limitation for terms on the
advisory boards and commissions. A second to the motion was made by Member Kelly.
Member Smith said that although he understood the arguments on both sides of the
issue he would strongly oppose this. He said the ordinance provides a vehicle for
the Council to bring new people on the boards and commissions as opposed to
maintaining the status quo by reappointments as has been the tradition in the
past.
Member Kelly commented that the idea of Ordinance No. 102 was to bring new people
onto the boards and commissions and to get more individuals involved in the
community. However, over the past several years she had not seen these people
come forth. So to deny a position to someone who has spent a tremendous amount of
time and effort, and actually is almost irreplaceable, is really disappointing.
She mentioned that there are numerous ways for people to serve this community
besides boards and commissions.
Member Paulus said she was concerned that, by allowing individuals to remain on
boards and commissions for an indefinite time, we would be dooming the boards with
retirements at some point in the future which would result in large voids if new
and younger people were not being groomed to serve.
Member Smith recalled that there was a waiting period before this ordinance took
effect and so we are just now seeing these potential openings. He referred to the
applications included in the Council packet as the indication that there are a lot
of people who would like to get involved in the community. Member Smith stated
that the ordinance should be given a chance to work.
Following further discussion on the issue, Mayor Richards said that this is a
philosophical issue on which people have different views. No Council can bind a
future-Council-regardless of when the action was taken. The important thing is
that everyone on the Council has had the chance to express their opinion. Mayor
Richards then called for rollcall vote on the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Rice, Richards
Nays: Paulus, Smith
Motion carried.
REPORT GIVEN ON LEGISIATIVE LOBBY MEETING Member Kelly reported that she and
Member Rice had attended the AMM Legislative Breakfast Meeting on Saturday,
January 27. There was discussion regarding the changes proposed to the
legislature in the pre -1979 tax increment districts. She said she was concerned
about the 50th & France District and the projects that are anticipated there.
She urged movement towards construction of the proposed parking deck in that area
before legislation would be passed that would eliminate the City from doing those
projects.
INFORMATION REQUESTED ON TAX FORFEITED LAND ACQUIRED BY CITY Member Kelly
commented that during the discussion on tax forfeited land she was surprised to
learn that the City is unable to sell any that has been acquired for public use.
She asked for information as to the amount of open space land, what has been
acquired as tax forfeited land by the City over the years, what if any could be
sold by the City and also if the Park Board has discussed this in their study of
the year 2000.
RECYCLING CONCERNS NOTED Member Kelly reported that in her neighborhood, on
garbage day last Friday, there were paper bags, pop cans, etc., left laying all
over. Also, the driver was not very courteous as he parked the truck in the middle
of the street, leaving the truck doors open, so residents could not get through.
Manager Rosland said he would handle this problem. Member Paulus mentioned that
there is a Recycling'Hot Line that should be called with concerns such as these.
ST LOUIS PARR LETTER OF 1/26/90 TO REALTORS DISCUSSED Member Paulus shared a
letter of invitation she had received from the City of St. Louis Park to acquaint
realtors with their municipality. This seminar was a blend of information between
the City ordinances and the School District. Member Paulus proposed that the City
consider doing something like this jointly with the Edina School District and ask
the Chamber of Commerce to support it financially. She commented that sometimes
realtors are the source of problems regarding attitudes and understanding and that
dissemination of this information could be beneficial. She mentioned that she had
sent a copy of the letter to Dr. Ray Smythe, Superintendent of Schools and that
she would be attending the seminar.
STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT INVITATION EXTENDED TO EDINA SCHOOL BOARD CHAIR Mayor
Richards stated he had extended an invitation to Sarah Jones, Edina School Board
Chair, asking that the Board designate one of their members to attend the
Strategic Planning Retreat when the date is set.
WHITE BEAR LAKE TOBACCO BAN INFORMATION SHARED Mayor Richards shared an
informational folder he had received regarding the White Bear Lake Tobacco Free
Project. He asked that it be passed on to the Community Health Services Advisory
Committee when they look at that issue.
NEWSPAPER ARTICLE ON 'DRUG -USE ALLEGATION TIED TO SOJOURNER SHELTER' NOTED COUNCIL
MEMBERS Mayor Richards passed out an article from the Hopkins /Minnetonka Sailor
on alleged drug use that is tied to the Sojourner Shelter, a home for battered
women in Minnetonka. Accompanying the article was a statement made to the
Minnetonka City Council by the resident making the allegation.
PROTOTYPE OF COUNCIL CALENDAR SHOWN: DATE OF MARCH 12 SET FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING
SESSION Manager Rosland handed out a prototype of the proposed calendar for use
by the Council and explained the format. He said it should help focus everyone on
the meetings they are required to attend. Manager Rosland announced that the date
of Monday, March 12 at 6:00 p.m. at Braemar Clubhouse has been set for the
Strategic Planning Session.
MANAGER'S VACATION NOTED Manager Rosland advised that he would be on vacation for
for the next few weeks and will miss the Council Meeting on February 20. He said
that Gordon Hughes, Assistant City Manager, will represent him.
RESPONSE TO BE SENT TO LEGISIATORS REGARDING T.I.F. MEMO RECEIVED FROM LMC
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Mayor Richards said he felt the position of the City of Edina
should be stated in a letter our-legislators, Senator Donald Storm and
Representatives Sidney Pauly and Mary Forsythe, regarding the Legislature taking
action to restrict tax increment financing during the session beginning February
12, 1990. Member Paulus recommended this correspondence be shared with the 50th &
France Association, so they too may begin a letter writing campaign if they wish.
Assistant Manager Hughes said he would take a copy of the letter to the 50th &
France Steering Committee meeting next week. Mayor Richards suggested that he or
other Council Members be available to attend if the Association felt it would be
helpful.
CABLE COMMISSION SETS 3/7/90 FOR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES MEETING Member Smith
advised that he will be attending the March 7, 1990 Southwest Suburban Cable
Commission Goals and Objectives Meeting and requested input from the Council
Members on any issues they may have. He noted that this is the first opportunity
offered within the last 3 -4 years to voice concerns. Mayor Richards inquired
whether the Council had read the cable article in the newspaper and said that it
was worthwhile.
*CLAIMS PAID Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Rice to
approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the CHECK REGISTER
dated 2/5/90 and consisting of 24 pages. General Fund $187,806.63, Communications
$1,401.03, Art Center $4,043,42, Capital Fund $1,954.74, Golf Course Fund
$25,188.23, Recreation Center.Fund $5,447.43, Gun Range Fund $306.18, Edinborough
Park $15,737.32, Utility Fund $237,584.52, Liquor Dispensary Fund $8,043.64,
Construction Fund $129,729.22, Total $617,242.36.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared the
meeting adjourned at 9:35 P.M.
Acting City Cle
w9t��1�
o� e �.., 71
O
ies•
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To:
Kenneth Rosland
Agenda Item -:
III.
B, C,D, E.
From:
Craig Larsen
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Date:
March 19, 1990
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject:
Cahill School and St.
❑
To Council
Patricks Church Re-
development
Action
❑
Motion
0
Resolution
-
0
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission sends to the Council the above Subject matter with no
recommendation, on a 4 -4 vote. Staff has recommended approval of the following
actions:
Number votes required
to pass
4 1. Amend Comprehensive Plan from Quasi - Public
and Medium Density Residential to Single
Family and Low Density Residential.
4 2. Repeal Heritage Preservation Overlay District,
HPOD.
4 3. Preliminary Rezoning, R -1, Single Dwelling
Unit District to PRD -2, Planned Residential
District
3 4. Preliminary Plat Approval Highcroft Addition.
13 single family lots, 21 townhouse lots and
one outlot for common area.
Subject to the following conditions:
1. Final.Rezoning
2. Final Plat Approval
3. Subdivision Dedication
s
4. Developers Agreement
5. Landscaping Plan and Bond
6. Investigation of Historical Park near 70th and Cahill
INFO /BACKGROUND
The subject proposal has been heard on three separate occasions by the Planning
Commission. Attached for your review are copies of minutes, development plans
and correspondence received for each of those minutes. The plan presented for
Council consideration includes 13 single family lots and 21 townhouse units.
(Full size prints are attached). The original submittal requested 13 single
family lots and 25 townhouse units.
As mentioned earlier the Planning Commission forwarded the proposal on a 4 -4 tie
vote. A motion on all elements proposed was the only action considered. I
would call your attention to the February 28, minutes, in which individual
members expressed their opinions on elements of the plan.
J )
LOCATION MAP
REZONING &
SUBDIVISION
NUMBER Z -90 -1 and 5 -90 -1
LOCATION West 70th Street and Cahill Road
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
REQUEST R -1, Single Family To PRD -3, Planned Residential District.
Repeal of Heritage Preservation District.
Preliminary Plat Approval for Ridgewood Addition.
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
- I
DRAFT OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
- HEL:D- ON-WEDNESDAY— FEBRUARY --28 -1990 77":30 -P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
UMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Gordon Johnson, Nan Faust, Helen McClelland,
Robert Hale, Lee Johnson, Geof Workinger, David Runyan,
Charles Ingwalson
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Bailey, John Palmer, Virginia Shaw
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner
Fran Hoffman, City Engineer
Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Commissioner Runyan moved for approval of the January 31, 1990 Community
Development and Planning Commission Minutes. Commissioner Workinger seconded
the motion. Commissioner McClelland asked to have the minutes revised for
Agenda Item, Z -90 -1, correct the spelling of Mr. Everson's name from Iverson to
Everson and to add after her statement "she will not support development of a
neck lot " nor a building _pad cut into a hill and a substandard lot. Regarding
the townhouse proposal Commissioner McClelland "wants added," Doubles or a four
plex maximum ". Commissioner Hale asked to have the minutes revised for Z -90 -1
to add his comments; they are as follows: 1) Commissioner Hale asked if the
driveway easement for Lot 13 couldn't run easterly to the driveway for the
townhouses. Mr. Larsen said this was being considered. 2) Commissioner Hale
asked about the "emergency overflow" on lot 9 as shown on sheet 6 of 8, and
wouldn't this cause problems with the steep slope and with the townhouses below.
3) Commissioner Hale asked if there were any restrictions on the driveway width
which would apply to the 25 foot wide neck lot. Mr. Larsen said no. Z -90 -2 4)
Commissioner Hale noted that there is residential directly across the pond and
very expensive residential across the pond to the north. .5) Commissioner Hale
asked Mr. Larsen if Section 11(b) of Ordinance No. 804 as it applies to property
adjoining a pond and calling for a 100 foot setback would apply. Mr. Larsen
said no. With the above mentioned requested revisions the Commission all voted
aye to approve the minutes for January 31, 1990.
II. OLD BUSINESS:
Z -90 -1 Ron Clark Construction, Inc., R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District
to PRD -3, Planned Residential District.
S -90 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval for Ridgewood Addition.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential
to Low Density Residential
1
' T
Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission at their last meeting suggestions were made
to the Developer, Mr. Clark and a number of those suggestions are presented this
-- evening in a revised plan - _ --
Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note the changes as follows:
Mr. Larsen pointed out the preliminary plat continues to illustrate 13 lots.
Minor lot line adjustments are made on lots 7,8,9,10 and 13. As a result the
number of variances on lot 7 are reduced from 3 to 2. Lot 7 now has the
required 30 feet on frontage on a public street. Lot width and lot depth to
perimeter ratio variances are still required. Also, portions of lots 9 and 10
have been added to lot 13 to allow more flexibility in siting a new home.
However, Lot 13 still requires a lot depth variance.
Mr. Larsen explained the previous proposal contained 25 units in one 7 unit
- building and 3 -six unit buildings. The revised proposal illustrates 21 units
with no building larger than 4 units. The result is that the development now
meets our definition for Low Density Attached Residential. Low Density Attached
Residential allows up to six units per acre and up to 4 units per building. The
revised plan also allows for a PRD -2 zoning compared to the previous PRD -3
zoning. The proposed plan complies with all requirements of the PRD -2 district,
including lot coverage and number of units per building.
Mr. Larsen said the proposed site plan also reduces to 2 the number of curb cuts
serving the townhouse development. One is at the far west side of the property
near the crest of the hill. The second lines up with Limerick Lane.
Mr. Larsen told the Commission that although the Commission previously voted to
amend the Comprehensive Plan to Medium Density Residential, it may want to
consider Low Density Residential for the townhouse site. The Plan defines Low
Density as follows:
LOW DENSITY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL (0 -6 DU /acre). This designation is
intended to include two family dwellings, townhouses, and other multi - family
developments containing a maximum of four dwelling units per building or
structure. Single family dwellings may also be a compatible use in such areas.
It is intended that this designation will provide a variety of housing types in
relatively close proximity to single family residential areas and will represent
a transitional use between single family areas on high volume roadways or more
intense uses. Although a maximum of 6 DU /acre is noted, maximum densities will
be influenced by surrounding single family densities.
Mr. Larsen noted the Commission has previously taken action on repeal of the
Heritage Preservation Overlay District and the Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
Actions remaining are:
1. Amend recommendation on Comprehensive Plan to change townhouse portion
of the plan to Low Density Attached Residential.
2. Preliminary rezoning from R -1 to PRD -2 for townhouse portion of the
site.
3. Preliminary Plat approval for 13 single family lots, 21 townhouse lots
and one outlot (townhouse common areas).
K
Staff Recommended Conditions:
1. Final Rezoning
2. Final Plat Approval
3. Parkland Dedication
4. Developers Agreement
5. Landscaping Plan and Bond
6. Investigation of Historical Park Near 70th and Cahill
Mr. Larsen told the Commission he became aware today, relative to the Historical
Designation and Historical Park that there is some confusion and that it may be
his fault. Mr. Larsen said the Heritage Preservation Board (HPB) which
considered this request recommended that the building could be removed, but the
site where the foundation is, or the use of some of the foundation materials on
the site, should be designated as historically significant. Mr. Larsen said on
a.staff level this recommendation was taken a step further to include the
possibility of expanding the historical area to other - corners of the Cahill
settlement. Mr. Larsen said the reason this approach was investigated was due
to the proposed residential character of the development on the west, and the
renovation taking place on the commercial side of Cahill where the Old Cahill
School and the store were located.. Mr. Larsen said staff never meant to take
away from the HPB's recommendation, but more to expand the area of search for
historical significance. Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note that
investigation of a Historical Park is one of the points that needs to be
addressed and a solution found for final approval.
Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen what the lot depth is for Lot 13.. Mr.
Larsen said at its shallowest point Lot 13 is 120 feet deep. This depth
complies with the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance but not with the
lot depth of the properties in the surrounding neighborhood as defined in
Subdivision Ordinance No. 804.
Commissioner L. Johnson asked Mr. Larsen if the slopping concerns would be
addressed at this level or could they be part of the Developer's Agreement. Mr.
Larsen said it could be made part of the Developer's Agreement if the Commission
so requested, but those concerns, regardless would be addressed by the
Engineering Department before final approval.
Mr. Ron Clark, proponent,,Nancy Horn, and Mike Gair Mr. Clark's representatives,
Gary Nyberg, Heritage Preservation Board, and interested residents were present.
Mr Gary Nyberg, representative from the Heritage Preservation Board addressed
the Commission informing them that the Board felt the church was architecturally
insignificant, however, the site has historic significance. The Board
recommended that a pocket be developed similar to the one near the Edina Mills
site and that it be developed on the west side of Cahill Road. It was also
recommended that some of the foundation from the church should be incorporated
into the development of a pocket park. Mr. Nyberg.said that was their
recommendation to the Edina City Council.
Commissioner L. Johnson asked Mr. Nyberg if the HPB considered locating the
pocket park on the east side of Cahill Road. Mr. Nyberg said at the time this
item was considered that was not mentioned as a possibility. Mr. Nyberg added
that he feels since this is the last remaining piece still intact, the pocket
3
I
park should be located on or near the original site of the church. Commissioner
Runyan asked Mr. Nyberg if the HPB had any specific recommendations for a pocket
park, and did they look at the possibility of a commemorative marker. Mr.
Nyberg said the most logical suggestion from their meeting was to incorporate
and /or use the footings to create a commemorative marker, and have the pocket
park constructed similar to the Edina Mills Park. Mr. Nyberg said the Board
found this solution to make the most sense due to the size of the church and the
high cost of upkeep and the removal of the church from the site. Chairman
Johnson asked how much space does the Board think will be needed for the park.
Mr. Nyberg responded that he has no idea, but probably the size of the Edina
Mills Park. Commissioner Runyan asked if the Board wants the whole foundation
incorporated into the park. Mr. Nyberg replied that the Board would like to see
some of the stones from the foundation used to commemorate the site, and have
some parking nearby if possible. Commissioner L. Johnson pointed out that since
the land is privately owned, who would fund the purchase of the land for the
park and what funds would be used to maintain it? Mr. Larsen answered that that
is difficult to access because at this level the Planning Commission and the
Heritage Preservation Board do not have the power to allocate funds for a park.
Continuing, Mr. Larsen explained the City Council is the body that will study
this aspect of the proposed development and will make their decision. Mr Larsen
said that is why staff has expanded it's search for a park and proposed an
alternative to the park being located on the site. Staff looked at the original
Cahill settlement which included all corners of 70th and Cahill Road.
Commissioner Faust said in a way that puts the cart before the horse. She added
how can the developer design a project if they do not know'what the Council
wants to do about the historical aspect of the site. Mr. Larsen said that is
true, but it is a factor the developer is aware of, and if final approval is
granted the development will have to reflect what the Council has ordered.
Mr. Mike Gair presented to the Commission the revisions that have taken place as
a result of their recommendations. Mr. Gair pointed out the site is 12.8 acres.
The revised proposal depicts 21 townhouses and 13 single family homes. The
price of the single family homes will be between $350 thousand - $700 thousand.
The price of the townhouses will be between $250 thousand - $300 thousand. Mr.
Gair pointed out Mr. Clark is a quality builder and has constructed many quality
houses and townhouses in the City. Continuing, Mr. Gair said the townhouses
would be stucco, brick, and cedar shakes. Mr. Gair pointed out that the project
would create an excellent tax base for the City and the single family homes
would add children to the Edina school system. With graphics Mr. Gair pointed
out the proposed development site and how it relates to the surrounding area.
Mr. Gair added that the change in the number of townhouses from 25 to 21 give
the townhouse site zoning potential for Low Density Attached versus the previous
request for Medium Density Attached. He added there are no attached units more
than four, and the rest are two and three unit buildings. Mr. Gair noted that
the previous plan had three accesses and the revised plan indicates two.
Mr. Clark addressed the Commission informing them he has worked hard on this
project to decrease the density. He told the Commission he is willing to work
with the Council and City to come to an agreement on the park. Continuing, Mr.
Clark said he will construct a quality development and will work hard to provide
adequate screening and buffering and perimeter landscaping that everyone would
find acceptable. Mr. Clark said he will cooperate in any way possible to make
this development blend into the community and to address any individual
concerns.
4
Commissioner Faust said she doesn't understand how there can be 18% less
townhouses and only 3 1/2% less land coverage. She asked if the size of the
townhouses have been increased. Mr. Gair said the townhouses have not been
increased in size. Commissioner Faust asked the size of the townhouses. Mr.
Gair said the townhouses are 30 feet X 83 feet. They will have 1600 square feet
on the main level, with a total of 2000 square feet for the footprint, which
includes the garage. Commissioner L. Johnson explained that the 18% decrease in
townhouses is taken from the original townhouse total of 25 minus the 4, which
is an 18% decrease. The 3 1/2$ decrease in land coverage is taken from the
whole development.
Commissioner Hale asked why the driveway access for Lot 13 doesn't access via
the drive from the townhouse development rather that West 70th Street. Mr.
Gair said the reason for that is because of the grade. It is too steep.
Commissioner Runyan agreed adding that the slope for that driveway access would
be around 10 %. -
Commissioner Workinger said he doesn't like the idea of any type of easements on
properties. He added he wants to make sure• a driveway easement isn't added to
Lot 13 after final approval. Commissioner Workinger said he wants Lot 13 to
remain as presented. Chairman G. Johnson said from a legal standpoint if the
future property owners agree an easement can be created. Commissioner L.
Johnson said that maybe to prevent that from happening it could become part of
the Developer's Agreement.
Commissioner L. Johnson questioned Mr. Gair on where the slope easement would be
located. Mr. Gair said their slope easement would not extend to the erosion
control line. He added this would leave flexibility for structure placement.
Mr. Gair asked Commissioner L. Johnson if his idea was to have the slope
easement and erosion control line be coincidental. Commissioner L. Johnson
said that he would feel more comfortable if the slope easement extended to the
erosion control line.
Commissioner McClelland commented that she has concerns about substandard lots
within a new development. Commissioner McClelland said she would like to have
one lot removed from the single family subdivision. She added if one lot is
removed variances would not be required and the proposed neck lot would be
removed. Continuing, Commissioner McClelland said that as a result of the new
Subdivision Ordinance the.Commission should look very carefully at developments
that require variances. Mr. Larsen explained that the new subdivision ordinance
is a guideline to aide in their review process. Commissioner McClelland told
the Commission she walked the site for a second time and was appalled by the
condition, size, and state of repair of the retaining walls on the back side of
the property. She noted that there is erosion present and agrees with
Commissioner L. Johnson that the slope easement should be coincidental with the
erosion line. Commissioner McClelland submitted to the Commission a graphic
that shows 12 lots instead of the proposed 13 and reduced the number of
townhouses from the proposed 21 to 16. Commissioner McClelland said she has a
grave concern regarding Lot 7 which would create a neck lot if approved. She
pointed out the steepness in topography in the northwest corner and the steep
retaining walls.
Linda Smithson, 5608 West 70th Street told the Commission the neighborhood is
not interested in multi family housing on the site. She said the poll taken
5
indicates the neighborhood wants the site to remain single family. She pointed
out low density is to be influenced by the density of the single family
neighborhood. Ms. Smithson added she wants the density decreased in the middle
section. She pointed out the twin homes on the northwest corner have the
appearance of single family residences, adding that type of low density
development is the type of guidance she would like to see in this development if
there is to be multiple housing at all. Continuing, Ms. Smithson said if there
is to be a park, the townhouse development would appear tighter than what has
been presented. Ms. Smithson said the view of the roof lines would be
detrimental to the value of the homes across the street.
Mr. Miles Hersey, property owner at Highpointe, told the Commission when he
purchased his property he was told the site would remain as is, due to the
historical significance of the land. He added he does not want to look at roof
lines and would prefer to look at a pocket park. Mr. Hersey said he would like
to see a pocket park developed on the site. Mr. Hersey asked Mr. Clark what the
height of the buildings would be on the portion of the historical site. Mr.
Gair answered that the buildings located on the historical site are one story
buildings.
Mrs. Darlene McDonnel, resident of Highpointe, told the Commission Mr. Clark
made no promise to her regarding the historical aspect of the site next to
Highpointe. She pointed out he did not own the site and therefore had no
control over the site. Continuing, she said when she first purchased her condo
she was concerned about the dumpster situation at the school because it was kept
very messy. Since that time garbage containment has improved. She added the
only change that has taken place for her is that instead of a second set of
condominiums being developed Mr. Clark chose to develop townhouses because the
market became soft for condo's. Mrs. McDonnel said she is very happy at
Highpointe and Mr. Clark builds a quality project.
Donna Ebert, 7004 Lee Valley Circle, said she does not know many facts but asked
when Mr. Everson bought the property was there anything that said you have to
keep the site historical. Mr. Everson said when he purchased the property that
was not considered, he added he knew the church was historical but he did not
know that he couldn't in the future develop his property. Ms. Ebert added she
is in favor of the project and believes that it will not deteriorate the value
of nearby properties and said it has to be better than looking at the school
across the street. She added it is a great tax base and will improve the
property around it and enhance the value.
Mr. Lowell Swanson, owner of a unit at Highpointe, asked if emergency vehicles
can get into and out of the site as proposed. Mr. Swanson also questioned if
the water runoff on the project will change if the site is developed. Mr.
Hoffman said emergency vehicles usually fight fires from the perimeter of
townhouse projects. He added the drainage plan presented is adequate. Mr.
Hoffman said no developer designs for a 100 year flood, as occurred in 1987.
Mr. Hoffman said if the property did not flood during that time they were very
lucky because many places received damage. He concluded that this development
should not have a negative impact regarding drainage. Mr. Swanson asked where
snow would be stored. Mr. Hoffman said on a townhouse site the snow issue is
"their issue ". They can haul the snow away, store the snow on the grass or do
whatever. The City has no requirement for snow removal.
0
Ms. Nancy Askoy, 5600 West 70th Street asked since more children are being born,
etc. and more school space is being needed is it wise to sell the school
building to a private developer if it may be needed as a school. Commissioner
Faust told Ms. Askoy that she spoke with Sara Jones and was told that the City
cannot afford to moth -ball a building for 20 years and put in on line.
Commissioner Faust told the Commission Sara Jones indicated that the Community
Center and Highlands School will take care of City needs. Commissioner Faust
pointed out the school is already privately owned.
Lyle Sellors, 5547 Village Drive, told the Commission he believes Mr. Clark has
done a good job with the plan and agrees there needs to be a transition between
the single family homes and the commercial area. Mr. Clark's low density
townhouses meets that need.
Commissioner McClelland told the Commission she is still concerned about the
density of the - townhouse proposal. She said Cahill has alot of traffic on it
and she cannot support housing so close to that intersection. Commissioner
McClelland added that she supports development of a pocket park on the site
where the church is located. Commissioner McClelland referred to her plan and
pointed out that in her plan curb cuts would be eliminated and the density would
be decreased to 16 units. She pointed out her plan would leave enough room to
incorporate the pocket park. Commissioner McClelland also added this plan would
greatly increase green space and an open feeling. Concluding, Commissioner
McClelland said she wants to see 1 lot out of the single family proposal
bringing that proposal to 12 lots, reduction in townhouse units from the
proposed 21 to 16 and a pocket park placed on site.
Mrs. Lindvell, resident of the area, told the Commission she feels the proposal
is too dense.
Commissioner Runyan commented that he felt the price of the units being
developed should add to and increase neighborhood property values. Residents
asked Commissioner Runyan if he would like to live across from the proposal.
Commissioner Runyan said in his opinion this development is good for the City
Edina as a whole. He said there is adequate open space and added that single
family homes all the way to Cahill Road does not make good sense. Ms. Ebert,
Lee Valley Circle, said again that she is in favor of the project. She said
this is the first time she, as a resident in the area, has ever been given
information before hand on what is going to be developed within her
neighborhood. She added the proposal makes good planning sense. She said in
her opinion what is there now is undesirable, and what is presented will look
better than the school and the church which isn't even clearly identified as
historically significant.
of
of
Commissioner Hale said he is a bit confused on where the one and two story
townhouses are located. With graphics, Mr. Gair pointed out the locations of
the one and two story townhouses on the site. The one story townhouses are
located on the east end and the two story units are in the middle. Chairman G.
Johnson questioned if that townhouse situation should be flip - flopped.
Commissioner Faust said she has a real concern between the transition of the
proposed townhouses and the proposed single family homes. She expressed concern
that the transition area is not large enough.
7
Commissioner Ingwalson told the Commission he believes the plan is sound and the
low density transition between the commercial and the single family units is
appropriate. Commissioner Ingwalson expressed concern over the pocket park and
said it is unfortunate that this issue wasn't resolved before this meeting. Mr.
Larsen explained that a parkland dedication of cash could occur, or the pocket
park could be located on the site. Mr. Larsen commented he agrees that the
situation regarding the park is fuzzy. Commissioner Ingwalson asked if after
the Council makes their decision regarding the park would the proposal come back
to the Commission for review. Mr. Larsen said the townhouse portion would come
back to the Commission for final approval. The park aspect will be part of the
townhouse plan.
Commissioner Faust asked Mr. Larsen what is the requirement for parkland
dedication. Mr. Larsen said when the City does not want land for parkland
dedication they require cash.
Commissioner Hale asked Mr. Clark if he considered single family homes where the
westerly 9 townhouse units are located. Mr. Clark said putting single family
homes farther to the east did not work well. Continuing, Mr. Clark explained the
natural place to break the transition between single family homes and townhouses
is where the terrain changes. Mr. Clark said that seemed to be the logical
place to make that transition. Commissioner Hale asked if they located houses
in that area how many would there be. Mr. Clark said at a guess around 4 single
family houses. Mr. Clark noted that they toyed with the idea of zero lot line
dwellings in that area.
Chairman Johnson asked the Commission for their opinions on the single family
proposal.
Commissioner McClelland said she cannot support the single family proposal as
presented with a substandard.lot and a neck lot. It's a new development that
requires variances.
Commissioner Workinger said he has no objection to the single family proposal
but still feels uncomfortable with the density of the townhouse development.
Commissioner Faust told the Commission she agrees with Commissioner McClellands
observations and indicated she is favorable to Commissioner McClellands
redesign.
Commissioner L. Johnson told the Commission he likes the single family portion
of the development. He added the best use of the topographical features is the
way it has been developed. He added the itent in using the land for housing is
to be creative and with the neck lot the land is not abused at all.
Commissioner L. Johnson said if he has a concern it is with Lot 5 because it may
be built down the hill. Continuing, he added the way this has been laid out is.
good and he added Lot 7 is an ideal lot. He reiterated that he wants the slope
easement�to be coincidental with the erosion control line. He noted that maybe
the slope easement could be relaxed for Lot 4 but not the others. He added he
has a concern that does not include the numbers or shape of the lots, but is the
waterflow that goes over the rotted timber walls next door. Commissioner L.
Johnson pointed out Mr. Clark does not have control over that, adding it is his
understanding that Mr. Hoffman will carefully review waterflow questions and
concerns. Commissioner L. Johnson said he would also like to see Lot 13
3
orientated to the east, the way it is shown, Lots 9 10, 13 all relate very well
to the townhouses.
Commissioner Runyan.said he agrees with Commissioner L. Johnsons points. He
added he could also see the slope easement relaxed a bit for Lot 5, but snug for
Lots 9, 10.
Commissioner Ingwalson said he concurs with the plan presented.
Commissioner Hale added he agrees.
Dorothy Omen, Lanham Lane, said she feels Commissioner McClellands plan is good.
Chairman Johnson asked the Commission for their opinions on the townhouse
project.
Commissioner L. Johnson said he is in favor of the townhouse proposal. He added
the two, three, and four unit buildings are an appropriate transition from the
commercial to single family. He pointed out if this project would be developed
with single family houses the number of houses that could be developed within
this area are around 10. Commissioner L. Johnson pointed out that massing and
sizing in his opinion is not a stumbling block. Commissioner L. Johnson said he
would like to see a little more park like atmosphere but added he feels an
attempt has been made. Commissioner L. Johnson said in his opinion the
development is appropriate and will be good for Edina.
Commissioner Ingwalson concurred with Commissioner L. Johnson and said it is a
good use of the site. He added single family houses on this corner does not
make sense. Continuing, he said the park is still an issue, but if Mr. Clark is
willing to take the consequences on where the Council locates the park, he has
no problem.
Commissioner Workinger said the density on the westerly portion of the site is
still a concern for him. It appears too dense. The transition between Lot 13
and Lot 9 and the townhouse development is still a little to tight.
Commissioner Runyan said he likes the project, and Mr. Clark has made every
effort to respond to the concerns of the Commission. He added this plan is
superior to what was previously proposed. Commissioner Runyan said given the
land the proponent has to work with, this project has been designed very well.
Commissioner McClelland said the plan is too dense, an allowance must be made
for the pocket park at this time, and added it is not necessary to develop every
parcel in Edina to its maximum. Commissioner McClelland said she want to see
less density and sides with the residents.
Commissioner Hale said the driveway is still a problem.
Commissioner Faust said she believes this part of Edina has been "dumped" on and
it is important to respond to these neighbors. She added Mr. Clark's doubles on
crosstown are fabulous and suggested that he develops doubles. Commissioner
Faust said she cannot vote for this because the pocket park has not been
addressed to her satisfaction.
E
Commissioner L. Johnson moved to recommend approval subject to the change in the
Comprehensive Plan from Medium Density Attached Residential to Low Density
Attached Residential, to recommend preliminary rezoning approval from R -1 to
PRD -2, and to recommend preliminary plat approval for 13 single family lots, 21
townhouse lots, and one outlot, approval subject to staff recommendations and
that the staff recommendations include a recommendation for a slope easement
closer to the 910 line for lots 6, 7 and 8 and at the 900 line for lots 4 and S.
Staff recommendations include: Final Rezoning, Final Plat Approval, Parkland
Dedication, Developers Agreement, Landscaping Plan and Bond and Investigation of
a Historical Park Near 70th and Cahill. Commissioner L. Johnson said the Council
should not be prejudiced in any way as they consider the pocket park as
recommended in #6 of staff's recommendations. Commissioner Runyan seconded the
motion.
Marsh Everson pointed out Cahill Road is the buffer between the commercial area
and residential neighborhood.
Upon roll call vote: Mrs. Faust, Nay; Mr. Hale, Nay; Mr. L. Johnson, Aye; Mrs..
McClelland, Nay; Mr. Rynyan, Aye; Mr. Workinger, Nay; Mr. Ingwalson, Aye;
Mr. G. Johnson, Aye. Motion failed on a 4 -4 vote.
Chairman G. Johnson said the proposal is to be forwarded to the Council with no
recommendation.
10
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Edina Community Development and Planning Commission Members
FROM: Craig Larsen, City Planner
SUBJECT: Revised plans for redevelopment of Cahill School and "Old" St.
Patrick's church properties
DATE: February 28, 1990
The attached letter, from Gair and Associates, details revisions to the
redevelopment plan made since the last Commission Meeting. The purpose of this
memorandum is to evaluate the revised plan relative to the Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinances.
Single Family Development
Changes to the single family portion of the development are relatively subtle.
The preliminary plat continues to illustrate 13 lots. Minor lot line
adjustments are made on lots 7,8,9,10 and 13. As a result the number of
variances on lot 7 are reduced from 3 to 2. Lot 7 now has the required 30 feet
on frontage on a public street. Lot width and lot width -to perimeter ratio
variances are still required. Also, portions of lots 9 and 10 have been added
to lot 13 to allow more flexibility in siting a new home. However, Lot 13 still
requires a lot depth variance.
Townhouse Development
The previous proposal contained 25 units in one.7 unit building and 3 six unit
buildings. The revised proposal illustrates 21 units with no building larger
than 4 units. The result is that the development_ now meets our definition for
Low Density Attached Residential. Low Density Attached Residential allows up to
six units per acre and up to 4 units per building. The revised plan also allows
for a PRD -2 zoning compared to the previous PRD -3 zoning. The proposed plan
complies with all requirements of the PRD -2 district, including lot coverage and
number of units per building.
The proposed site plan also reduces to 2 the number of curb cuts serving the
development. One is at the far west side of the property near the crest of the
hill. The second lines up with Limerick Lane.
Comprehensive Plan
Although the Commission previously voted to amend the Plan to Medium Density
Residential, it may want to consider Low Density Residential for the townhouse
site. The Plan defines Low Density as follows:
LOW DENSITY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL (0 -6 DU /acre). This designation is
intended to include two family dwellings, townhouses, and other multi - family
developments containing a maximum of four dwelling units per building or
structure. Single family dwellings may also be a compatible use in such areas.
It -is intended that this designation will provide a variety of housing types in
relatively close proximity to single family residential areas and will represent
a transitional use between single family areas on high volume roadways or more
intense uses. Although a maximum of 6 DU /acre is noted, maximum densities will
be influenced by surrounding single family densities.
The Commission has previously taken action on repeal of the Heritage
Preservation Overlay District and the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. actions
remaining are:
1. Amend recommendation on Comprehensive Plan to change townhouse portion
of the plan to Low Density Attached Residential.
2. Preliminary rezoning from R -1 to PRD -2 for townhouse portion of the
site.
3. Preliminary Plat approval for 13 single family lots, 21 townhouse lots
and one outlot.(townhouse common areas).
Staff Recommended Conditions:
1. Final Rezoning
2. Final Plat Approval
3. Parkland Dedication
4. Developers Agreement
5. Landscaping Plan and Bond
6. Investigation of Historical Park Near 70th and Cahill
GAIR & ASSOCIATES
Division of Kidde Consultants, Inc.
February 16, 1990 Site Design and Planning Consultants
Craig Larsen
Community Development Director
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
RE: Highcroft Revisions
.Cahill & 70th Redevelopment
Gear Mr. Larsen:
With this letter, we are transmitting copies of revised plans for Ron Clark
Construction Company's. residential development proposal. These revisions are
in reaction to our most recent meeting with the Planning Commission and area
resident input.
The plans have undergone slight revisions since our meeting with yourself, Phil
Dommer and Fran Hoffman.
The following is a summary of the changes which have been illustrated or noted
in the revised plan sheets:
1'. The single family plat portion has been revised to increase the width
of the "neck lot" from 25 feet to 30 feet. The result of this change
is that only two variances are requested, one being lot width, and
the other the perimeter area ratio.
2. Lot number 13 has been increased in area by combining lots 9 and 10.
This was a good suggestion by Mr. Hoffman and certainly adds to the
value and flexibility of lot 13. As a point of interest, lot 13 does
have a depth of 150 feet, though the lot depth variance is still
required.
3. In addition, access to lot 13 will be from 70th Street and a
preference will be placed on the driveway favoring the eastern side
of the lot. This in turn, will foster an orientation of the home
toward the east, resulting in the western portion of the lot being
rear and side yard complimenting the rear yard orientation for lots
10, 11 and 12.
The more significant changes in the plan have occurred in the area of the
townhouse development. A concession has been made in recognizing the potential
value that can be accrued to the project with fewer units. The result of
creating a development with no more than four units per building as suggested
by the Low Density Land Use District as defined by the comprehensive plan,
creates a site layout with a more spacious feeling and a more "playful display"
of the townhome units on the 4.2 acre site. The overall density of the property
2021 East Hennepin Avenue • Suite 250 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413
6121331 -8668 TWX:910- 576 -3111
is reduced from 25 units to 21 units and the layout is noticeably different and
appreciably improved over the previous plan.
An important consideration is the fact that the site building coverage has been
reduced from 28% to 24.5 %. This allows the property to fall within the zoning
ordinance design parameters of a PRD -2 district rather than a PRD -3 district.
Recognizing this fact and appreciating the importance of this change, the
developer requests that the rezoning for this portion of the property be
reconsidered for a PRD -2 district versus the earlier PRD -3 request.
You'll also note that only two access points are proposed from 70th versus three
as in former plans. The western access' has been located nearly coincidental
with the easterly most existing access from the school drop -off drive - through.
This location within the vertical profile of 70th allows for adequate site
distances in both easterly and westerly directions. The project engineer has
studied this aspect of the plan. The grading plan will accommodate a car and
a half length piatform at the intersection with 70th and then the grades will
drop southerly and easterly into the townhome units -.
The grading plan continues to accommodate a .grade separation, as well as
perpetuate a horizontal separation and landscape screening between the single
family detached and townhome portions of the plat.
In addition to the above changes, effort has been made in the eastern portion
of the site to shift the townhome four -unit buildings in closer proximity to
10th, thus increasing the rear yard spaces between the building and property
line. In the case of the easterly most building, there is an .increase of 20
feet, a 57% increase rear yard depth (35'..to 55') to maintain a more spacious
feel. Additionally, these plan revisions go a considerable distance in being
more confident about the preservation of the larger oaks on the eastern and
southern edge of the property. These considerations have been offered to
ameliorate concerns voiced by the condominium homeowners.
Changes to the townhome plan in terms of increase setback, attempts to preserve
trees, increased planting along the southern boundary in tandem with building
groups no larger than four units, increased open space, reduced density and
fewer curb cuts to 70th have, unarguably, increased the aesthetic quality of the
development and improved its marketability.
These changes are made in direct response to Planning Commission and area
resident inquiries. Mr. Clark has attempted to consider revisions which
represent responsible planning, engineering and aesthetically well conceived
solutions.
Should there be any questions regarding these revised plans, we would be pleased
to respond.
Kindest re6i.Ms,
`Michael J'. air
/lmt
U
Q
Lr o1D / J t
JP �
rc 0 LJ
o I
\ _ _ 92o -)
010 � ` / \ ., .�(.. . ` � \ ✓J' L�" '� ,..., � �/ � R / .
S J
Y
U
¢_
T. FITI-1
LJ LiLL]
uu
N. Otn STREET
_� �41
VILLAGE DR.
�IIII.
lil I I
—.Y
'�F f7' EvFyl,�`.El.a-fP.E:- B)n /l•'-'--"'�/I'
OEmm .J!-
/ SITE CONCEPT PLAN
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
S 114 EOIN4 INOUSTRIAL BLVD.
EDIRA. UN 5S438
m & Alumrtt"
:7+'
-- i T -
2- + -o SHEET p
OF 8
NORTH
O 21 SO 100 11O1ET
Q
/
SITE SUMMARY — —
I
/HIGHCROFT
TOTAL SITE ACRES 12.8 AC.
I
I /
SINGLE FAMILY ACRES 8.6 AC.
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 13 LOTS
V
GROSS DENSITY 1.5 AC UNITS
/AC. 1 \
/ HIGHCROFT
TOWNHOME ACRES 4.2 AC.
1
TOWNHOMES
I
TOW HOME UNITS 21 UNITS
1
2 CAR GARAGE' PER UNIT
11 GUEST PARKING SPACES
• 400 SO.FT. USABLE OPEN SPACE PER UNIT
GROSS DENSITY 5 UNITS /AC.
I
Y
U
¢_
T. FITI-1
LJ LiLL]
uu
N. Otn STREET
_� �41
VILLAGE DR.
�IIII.
lil I I
—.Y
'�F f7' EvFyl,�`.El.a-fP.E:- B)n /l•'-'--"'�/I'
OEmm .J!-
/ SITE CONCEPT PLAN
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
S 114 EOIN4 INOUSTRIAL BLVD.
EDIRA. UN 5S438
m & Alumrtt"
:7+'
-- i T -
2- + -o SHEET p
OF 8
NORTH
O 21 SO 100 11O1ET
a
z
Y IU
— — — W T ---
13.
e1opB
s' \ .4.
;d
b.
BLOCK
I
11. 10.
9
3 { �C
HIGHCROFT_TOWNHOMES ?—
i'
F ' ' 3LL J 8 / Q I
... C I Y 1 I - ,�� C.. L4'' 3• 2. •, 1.' n� �
O _
OUTLOT
a VILLAGE DR.
\ / 19Aer07 i; / v i I III /
.� ��'•�J' —mod C= 1s «:,< / %!�/
HIGH q ill
I� �8 '\t � � I ��\ �� \��..-. -.--- \\ J I , lI•r I /ill 3i;'. L T I �(�~ -~�
(� j�..
/ I� � w..l' .B�liti■
Development Summary
HIGHCROFT
SINGLE FAMILY ACRES 8.6 AC
i SINGLE FAMILY LOT AREA 7.a Al
90% OF a-
I R.O.W. 0.8 AC
I F OF SITE
9F. . LOTS 13 LOTS
YIN. LOT SIZE 16.800 SO.FT.
YAE LOT SIZE 42.400 SOFT.
I MEDIAN 1GT 21.700 SO. FT.
ZONED R -1
SETBACK STANDARDS REIDNBORwODO
I 0•MI •14101 00 : ED01AN
aoT oEer. - 1
pT. Sor •w - wAr ra
I GROSS DENSITY to UN /AC
HIGHCROFT TOWNHOMES
TOWNNOYE ACRES 4.7 AC
TOWNNOYE LOTS 21 LOTS
OUTLOT A
TOWNNOYE UNITS 21
SITE AREA PER UNIT 7492 SO. FT.
LOT AREA PER UNIT 2490 SO. FT.'
BUILDING AREA 2159.3 SO. FT.
BUI DRIG COVERAGE 24.3%
USEABLE SITE AREA PER J00 SO. FT
SITE ® REZON D PRO -]
B .TEA Cr R•NOARD4
rt. r•asD �r1• e0
DROSS DENSITY S UN /AC
/ I I of aDutat on
ll
�L
of Tm0 1.
LO 10-0213 —AL.3L LLlllQtfO SLUE 4M—lI ®taR.l
I 111' III' fra' .11 la,am
a >r' 110' Mr• .II R,am
S lN' 110' W' .1! ta.lm
a vN� n•' Mr .0 JE.Im
r n• n' o' .N R.Jm
v 1n uv� au• -u Iv.Jm
1 1N 110' N1 .1r rx.rm
10 Im' Ixl• NI' x0 x1.rm
11 111' 110' Nl' .N la.rm
I! iM' 110 1N' .11 la.®
I) Irf' Ile N0' .11 11.xm
PRELIMINARY PLAT
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
3114 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD.
EDINA. NN 334]3
-Ya a 4® Tn
WE: icE° -a-10 MQfT 4
a S
NORTN
_ 0 Z6 50 -100 150 FEET
Lu
'--' -- --
_
CONTROL, GRAV ENTR MC YCTIOM--TT 3
' SIL FENCE 1 I �.;h,.4 -W. Oth STREET
GFI•A VEL CONBTRUC710N _j
'S1't „5.0' �- ENTRANCE �
\ j � o v�r s to. fv. s � I .�� \ I •
Q "
-
�, .���� _ �l _.Lee I . � liJ� •.c.• ..u.l ' i
+r• °a`• - -s b /
�(G I s I vls.e i a --./ [- u� -• Jnoea �w -� - r I� /Q� 1I
p - VILLAGE DR.
REMOVE /
CITCIO / EAISTINOaYALL H
� I
�/� ► PSI/
w - ���i�� � I� X
Iv
FFFF
to
J �Iblo
����� >• ��' � i � aJ�'/ LFf�Fl -:D .� -'ate
919A a+—EO Fort Fl.w.°••w r i .� - �.
•1
J e.. �•..�� ^., ..- ,�. ^l= �'..
911A c.rX9 `-_ 5Pr'ATI�a _', •; �' \'..r I
r NA
J • ` r`._
�. I Sir RAC! I•wC.L M[T wlortCrcN • - ( � F
1 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN °` f
& EROSION CONTROL PLAN i
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION •., __ �• ;�
- •� 5111 lDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD. DVE: REV 0 - ?J �J
EOINA. MN lS I-1
.SS 6
. ®� NORTX OF S
OIaRI Cd•STRYCrrON [NrYA1Q a0l M1S..,G O[TAl 0 25 50 100 150 PUT
.0 1 ORAL= T
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1989, AT 7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL RECEPTION CONFERENCE ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman, Gordon Stuart, David Gepner, Gary Nyberg,
and Lois Wilder
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Gary Nyberg moved for approval of the minutes from the September 26, 1989,
meeting; Lois Wilder seconded the motion; all voted aye, motion carried.
II. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Old St. Patrick's Church - 7000 Cahill Road
Joyce Repya explained that on Wednesday afternoon, November 22, 1989, the City
Council met jointly with the Heritage Preservation Board, members of the
Historical Society and Park Board to discuss the Old St. Patrick's Church in
light of a possible redevelopment plan which would include the site. At that
meeting, Foster Dunwiddie, former chairman of the Heritage Preservation Board
and an authority on historic preservation, pointed out three possible options to
deal with the historic site. The three options were:
1. An adaptive re -use of the building.
2. Move the building to Arneson Acres and designate the site with an
historic marker and /or pocket park.
3. Tear down the building and commemorate the site with an historic marker
and /or pocket park.
No action was taken at that meeting, however, Mayor Richards asked the Heritage
Preservation Board to further discuss the options available for the Old St.
Patrick's Church and come up with a prioritized list of the most desirable
options.
Lois Wilder explained that from an historians perspective, since the original
1884 building was destroyed and reconstructed on the old footings in 1924, she
feels the significance lies in the site and not the structure. Mrs. Wilder
added that she would favor the development of a pocket park commemorating the
Cahill, Irish community on the site.
Gary Nyberg agreed with Mrs. Wilder pointing out that he felt the reconstructed
church was architecturally insignificant, and that he has always been bothered
by the fact that the parish sold the building with no apparent feelings for it;
then once they no longer owned it, they wanted it to be recognized for its
historic significance. Mr. Nyberg then questioned why, if the parishioners felt
the old church to be so historically significant, didn't they pursue
commemoration when they were the owners?
I
Addressing the issue of future uses for the building, Mr. Nyberg said that he
had not seen a clear use proposed for the building, and for that reasons, would
favor the construction of a pocket park. The park being similar to the Mill
site on West 50th Street, commemorating the corner as representative of the
Cahill district which included the church as well as a store and the old school
house.
Discussion ensued regarding the relationship of the church building to the
significance of the Cahill Settlement. Board members agreed that the Old St.
Patrick's Church, as it stands does not commemorate the historic Cahill
Community. Passerbys ask themselves, "Why is that old'building still there."
Gary Nyberg asked how much land would be available for a pocket park. Ms. Repya
explained that the amount of land would be dependent upon.the design of the
park.
Gordon Stuart stated that he felt the developer has a responsibility to design a
plan a development taking into consideration the existing conditions on a site,
and not simply molding the site to meet his needs. Mr. Stuart added that he
would favor an adaptive re -use of the building, if it could be done, pointing
out that apparently, no re -use alternatives have been pursued which leaves him
uncomfortable with the option of removing the structure.
David Gepner said he was impressed with the fact that the Cahill Community grew
around the 70th and Cahill corner, and that he agreed with the concept of
commemorating the site with a pocket park, pointing out that if the building on
the corner was so significant, why was the school building moved? The members
raised the a question of how the development of a pocket park would be funded.
Ms. Repya explained that when a subdivision is developed, a parkland dedication
is required of the developer, either in the form of land or cash. The amount of
land or money is dependent upon the number of lots established. If the cash
contribution is chosen, the funds to into the Park Department's budget for City
wide park maintenance /development. If the land contribution is chosen, a
portion of the property equal in value to what the cash contribution would have
been, is reserved for park development.
Gary Nyberg asked if the parkland dedication had been determined for the
proposed development. Mrs. Repya explained that it had not, but she would
advise the Board once the Parkland dedication had been set.
Gary Nyberg then stated that since the site, not the building was significant,
he would make a motion that the building should be moved and a pocket park
developed on the site to commemorate the Cahill district; or the City. Lois
Wilder seconded the motion.
Discussion ensued regarding all the options available. The Board decided that
they needed to address the various options prior to addressing the motion on the
floor. The vote was called. All voted nay; the motion was defeated.
The Board discussed the proposed options of adaptive reuse, moving the building
and commemorating the site, or tearing down the building and commemorating the
site.
Gary Nyberg pointed out that since so many parties are becoming involved in this
issue, namely the Park Board, Historical Society, and St. Patrick's Church,
that, it is important for the Heritage Preservation Board to make a
recommendation to the City Council.
Lois Wilder agreed with Mr. Nyberg adding that since the corner of 70th and
Cahill was the heart of the Irish Community that the site should definitely be
commemorated.
Gary Nyberg, addressing the option of adaptive re -use for the building explained
that the Board can wish and hope that a re -use will drop out of the sky, but the
fact of the matter is that unless the developer offers an alternative, re -use of
the building is not an option.
Mr. Nyberg continued to explain that the option.of moving the building to
Arneson Acres appears to be cost prohibitive when one considers the moving
expenses on top of bringing the building up to code, and making the building
handicapped accessible.
Gordon Stuart stated that he had gotten the impression at the meeting with the
City Council, that the issue of moving the building has been shot down with the
costs ranging around $150,000.00.
Lois Wilder added that she felt it was utter nonsense to consider spending
$150,000,00 to move the building.
Mr. Nyberg pointed out that he felt it simply didn't make sense to tear down a
structure like Wooddale School yet save a little building like the St. Patrick's
Church.
Gordon Stuart asked what would happen to the Heritage Preservation Overlay
zoning on the site if the building was moved. Board members agreed that the
pocket park would retain the zoning.
A brief discussion ensued relative to the options available and the task of
prioritizing them. Gary Nyberg explained that to prioritize the options in his
mind, would be a lost exercise, because the only viable option would be to move
the building and develop a commemorative pocket park.
Lois Wilder agreed with Mr. Nyberg, and further explained that since, as Foster
Dunwiddie pointed out, the footings of the church are from the original 1884
structure possibly then could be incorporated in the development of a pocket
site.
Gary Nyberg then moved to recommend to the Council that the Church building be
removed from the site and a pocket park commemorating the historic Cahill
Settlement be developed. The park should incorporate the footings from the
original 1884 church and be a part of the developer's parkland dedication. Lois
Wilder seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion carried.
Gordon Stuart added that while he was initially hesitant to recommend removal of
the building, after the discussion which has taken place, the motion addressed
by the Board appears to be the only viable option for the site.
B. Resolution of Appreciation - Patsy Johnson
Lois Wilder moved approval of the resolution commending Patsy Johnson for a job
well done as the Planning Staff representative to the Heritage Preservation
Board from May 1988 through November 1988. David Gepner seconded the motion.
all voted aye; motion carried.
III. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Bicentennial Plaques
Lois Wilder asked staff to research the status of the Bicentennial Plaques, that
were designed in 1976 to identify the historic properties in the City. No
action was taken.
B. Edina Walking /Driving Tours:
Gary Nyberg asked about the present status of the walking and driving tour of
Edina. Mrs. Repya explained that both tours are available at the Edina Public
Library, and are well received by the public. No action taken.
IV. NEXT MEETING DATE:
The Board agreed that the December meeting should be cancelled due to its close
proximity to Christmas. The next scheduled meeting will be January 23, 1990.
V. ADJOURNMENT: 8:30 P.M.
Joyce Repya
MINUTES OF ANNUAL MEETING
OF MEMBERS OF EDINA HIGHPOINTE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
AND MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
HELD MAY 2991986
The annual meeting of the members and the Board of Directors of Edina
Highpointe Condominium Association was held at Model Unit 101, 5501 Village
Drive, Edina, Minnesota 55435, on May 29, 1986 at 7 :00 P.M. pursuant to a call
made by the President and written notice given by the Secretary.
Pursuant to the provisions of the By -laws, Ronald E. Clark, President of the
Association, presided over the meeting, and Sandra L. Clark, Secretary of the
Association, acted as Secretary of the meeting.
The President introduced Lloyd Kepple of Oppenheimer, Wolff and Donnelly,
Counsel for Declarant, R.E.C., Inc. Mr. Kepple explained the purpose of the
meeting and reviewed the unit owners' documents.
Cindy Volkart of Declarant, R.E.C., Inc., discussed and reviewed the first
year operation statement and presented the proposed budget concerning the period
from July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987. The budget was approved by unanimous vote.
Doug Dollif of the Dollif Insurance Agency explained the insurance policies
covering the condominium building and the increasing cost of insurance.
The President then opened the meeting for new business.
After discussion, President of Declarant, R.E.C., Inc. and President of the
Association, Ronald E. Clark, agreed that certain dead trees situated on the
property would be replaced, either by the landscaper who planted them or by
R.E.C., Inc.
After discussion it was agreed and resolved that the date on which the
annual meeting was to be held would be changed from January, as called for in the
By -laws to June. Lloyd Kepple, counsel for the Declarant, a- reed to have an
amendment in the By -laws reflecting the change of the date for the annual meeting
drafted.
After discussion concerning the investigation of a window coating which
would reduce the sun and heat, it was agreed that Association member, Odd
Rovick, would refer any.information which he had to the President and that the
President would investigate window coatings.
After discussion concerning the unsightly parking of trucks and dumpsters at
the nearby :vlontessori School, upon motion duly made and seconded, it was resolved
that Association members Lowell Swanson and Odd Rovick, were appointed to
inquire of the City of Edina, and the Montessori School concerning the alleviation
of the problem caused by the parking of the trucks and dumpsters at the lontessori
School.
After discussion concerning the buildup of ice at the front entrance of the
Condominium boil &ng, and the possibility of installing a canopy extension, the
President of the Association and of Declarant R.E.C., Inc. stated that he would
investigate the ice buildup and that Declarant R.E.C., Inc. would install gutters if
it was felt that they would stop the ice buildup.
Discussion was held concerning the installation of an outside barbeque, but
no action was taken.
No other business coming before the.meeting, it was, on motion, duly made
and seconded, adjourned.
L-DINA HIGHPOINTE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
H
;
( President
\ f
/ Seefetary
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this y ovember� 1986.
xe LLOvo
'. � 112• Np *nRY .:� ;.. ... _.. -.._
-2-
February 27, 1990
To: Community Development and Planning Commission Members
City of Edina
Please add this letter as protest to the proposed development
of -the 70th and Cahill area by.Ron Clark Construction.
My wife and I are the original owners of one of the Condominiums
at Edina Highpointe. Before we purchased the condominium we were
told by Ron Clark and by his staff that the south woodsy area would
eventually be condominiums "mirrored" as our building. The new
building would be built on the south part of the property leaving
a garden type area between the two buildings. There were other
amenities promised as well.
As you can see, townhouse units were built on the south property
and they were built so close to our condominium units that they
are claustrophobic and overpowering to our middle units.
We were also told that the property to the North would be forever
preserved as an historical site, and that even if the building
were moved a park or garden effect would remain.
We are definitely opposed to more multiple dwellings in our area.
We are becoming like a "tenement" district. Edina is too lovely
to be marred anymore.
Please protect our investment, protect our home, protect our
landscape, protect our environment and - - - - --
do not approve the proposed plan by Ron Clark Construction.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
arvin Blair
Edina Highpointe
5501 Village Drive
mbb:nj
YNO
5539 Village Dr.
Edina, VN 55435
March 14, 1990
City of Edina Planning Department
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Council Members:
This has reference to the hearing Monday, March
19, 1990, concerning Ron Clark's proposal for
re- development of the Montessori School Property.
It is our opinion the Heritage Preservation Dis-
trict be repealed. The building standing on the
site is an eye -sore and its historic significance
may be retained with the erection of a historic
marker.
Ron Clark's preliminary concept plans for single
family and townhome development appear to be of
minimal density and will make a vast improvement
to the appearance and value of the immediate area.
Very truly yours, ,
Robert McKenna
Pauline H. McKenna
L
FASHION
PRODUCTION
CONSULTANT, COMMENTATOR
March 9, 1994
Mr. Fred Richards
7225 Fleetwood Drive
Edina, MN 55435
I am pleased with the tle vote preventing Ron Clark from
moving ahead with his proposed plans. Again, having been
a resident of Edina for the past 28 years, I am glad Edina
has such wonderful service, beautiful neighborhoods and
parks, and a community rich In history. I strongly plead that
the historical landmark church site be maintained as a park.
We need to stay committed to keeping Edina a
neighborhood community.
Again, thank you for your thoughtful attention.
Respectfully,
Delores K. Wilkie.
DEE ARNOLD- WILKIE
5501 Village Drive S. #106 • Edina, Minnesota 55435 • 612/941 -3335
3700 NICOLLET AVENUE
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55409
16121 824 -2624
3500 WEST 50T STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55410
(612) 9 27-8 641
2300 WEST OLD SHAKOPEE ROAD
BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431
(612) 884 -8145
The Honorable Fred Richards
Mayor, City of Edina
7225 Fleetwood Drive
Edina Mn 55435
Dear Mr. Mayor:
werne'sm QYjr�olLrs
FUNERAL CHAPELS
March 12, 1990
Enclosed is a copy of my letter of January 18, 1990, to the
members of the Community Development and Planning Commission,
City of Edina.
I still feel very strongly that truth should be demonstrated
and /or forced upon individuals selling property.
We now have condos directly south and west of our building.
If it was possible, I wish some members of the Council would
stand in the main entrance of our building and look to the
north and imagine high townhouses directly in front of our
building. Not only would this be contrary to what was
promised, but certainly inconsistent with the fine planning
that has made Edina citizens so proud of their city.
I sincerely feel the area is entitled to the preservation of
the Historical Park.
Thank you for giving your time to our community..
Si r ly,
J hn L. Werness
5501 Village Drive #103
Edina MN 55436
JLW /v
3700 NICOLLEI- AV[NUf.
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55409
16121624 -2024
3500 WEST 50-!- STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55410
/6121 927-8f541
7300 WEST OLD SMAKOPCC AOAD
BLOOMINGTON. MINNESOTA 55431
IR 171 HHn•11a•',.
COP1MUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF EDINA
John Bailey
Nan K. Faust
Robert W. Bale
Charles S. Inclwalson
Gordon V. Johnson
Lee W. Johnson
FUNERAL CHAPELS
January 18, 1990
Helen McClelland
John M. Palmer
David T. Runyan
Virginia Shaw
Geoffrey Workinger
About four years ago, my wife and I purchased a condo at
5501 Village Drive, known as Highpointe. 'We purchased this
property because we were told by the owner that directly south of
Highpointe another building would be built with condos, swimming
pool and party room, and that a caretaker would be arranged for
Highpointe and the new building. As you know, all we got was
a large group of townhouses.
We were also told that the property irmiediately north of us was
registered as an historical site and, if the old building were
ever removed, it would=be a park. Now, it looks as though we are
possibly being betrayed again with an application for more town-
houses right north of our Highpointe condo.
Should there not be some truth demonstrated and /or forced upon
individuals selling property?
Sinc�ly,
John L. Werness
1�
5501 Village Drive #103
Edina MN 55436
JLW /v
Morton M. Mower, M.D.
5501 Village Dr. #302
Edina, Minn. 55435
Mr. Fred S. Richards
7225 Fleetwood Dr.
Edina, Minn. 55435
Dear Mr. Mayor:
I write in opposition to the Ron Clark development proposal for placing town houses to the
immediate north of our property. It is my understanding that this is to be discussed at the
forthcoming city council meeting.
Mr. Clark is no stranger to development in this area, and has certainly done a creditable job in
the past. However there is presently too much new construction in the area just to the
southwest of us, and of a most ugly and distressing nature. There is very little space between
the new building and ours. In my opinion, it represents an eyesore and totally obstructs the
view of the families facing that way. To hem us in on the other side as well would be most
unfair. Perhaps it would be wise for you to inspect the area personally and verify the accuracy
of this description.
It is very important that we continue to have a park setting to our north. To place new
construction on that side as well would totally destroy our property values as well as severely
impact our quality of living. I don't know if the proposed site is actually an historical site as
has been suggested, but if not, it should be. It is an idyllic setting and whatever it takes to
preserve it should be done. As private citizens, our only recourse is to rely on you and the city
council to protect us from unwarranted and excessive and unsightly development. I implore you
to approach this matter in a fair minded way.
Sincerely,
Morton M. Mower, M.D.
HENRY T. RUTLEDGE
MINNEAPOLIS
7.,c , I , , j I /e- r- - / 4' irl a
L
ra
d I. ji,
&Vv Crf
A. Li L L =a W OPP) LL
g -/ (,. Z�. 4 &)1 144, LL 4—
L
L
L
cf- --f- 6i, L
L
Mr. Fred Richards
Mayor, City of Edina
7225 Fleetwood Drive
Edina, MN, 55435
Dear Mayor Richards,
March 10, 1990
Subject: Proposed Townhouse
Development of 70th
and Cahill Corner
I am attaching a letter which I had previously written
to all members of the Edina Planning Commission and the Park
Board.
I believe that letters such as this did have an
influence in the decisions made at the Planning Commission
meeting on February 28th. Since the situation is unchanged,
I hope my thoughts bear your consideration.
I can't believe that the best interests of our
neighborhood, and of Edina, are served by the addition of
yet more townhouses in this area.
Sincerely,
Anthony E. Roth
Highpointe #303
5501 Village Drive
Edina, 55435
. I .^
,
16 January 1990
Mr. John Bailey
Member, Community Development
and Planning Commission
69 Woodland Circle
Edina, MN, 55424
Dear Mr. Bailey,
I own a condominium unit in Hi ghpointe, which faces
the old St. Pat's Church at 70th & Cahill.
Although I am not an original owner in this 3 year old
building, I bought my unit on the assurance from current
residents and Merrill Lynch that the ex-church property was
"Heritage" and could not be developea. As a homeowner in
Edina for 34 years, my wife and I would noi have purchased
here if we Uad.known that our "front yard" was to be
developed.
Adding insult to injury,
the St. Pat property is none o
builder who, I'm told, assured
Highpointe, that nothing COULD
across the street.
the man
ther tna
all the
EVER be
who plans to develop
n Ron Clark, the
original buyers at
built or changed
I believe that it is an article of bad faith on the
part of the City of Edina to allow this property to become
residential. I sincerely hope that you agree with this
position, and will let the 70th & Cahill corner remain a
Heritage site, and perhaps become another of our lovely city
parks.
Sincerely Yours,
ANTHONY E. ROTH
Unit 4303, HIGHPOINTE
5501 Villaqe Drive
Edina, MN, 55435
_ ���r mac'} -� Gc�•i�r�eJ
• „ ice'
Z -� _ -.... .
L• iC.-¢� :✓fie+"• � � / L
zle
I j -
G,
K. ROVICK
Dr. 1305 f_WJ
[090
� -�`-�s --tom / /�....y , �. ---L� � , r -• �� .�.-� r..� , _
r -- T
.- it�a�� -cam -Q, G ?_.r �b i•.� L G (.� /-
1
March 10, 1990
Honorable Fred aichards:
Let me introduce myself; I'm Darliene McDonald, a resident
of Edina Iiighpointe, 5501 Village Drive. I have resided here
since the building was completed in 19035. I bought my condo at
1ji- hpointe because it was built by Ron Clark, a respected buil-
der in our area, whose reputation for quality and design iz:-
unsurpassed.
I am .writing in support of Ron Clark's proposed development
of the property to the north of Highpointe, at 70th and Cahill
Road. The revised site plan submitted to the Planning Commis-
sion at their meeting February 28th, In my opinion would be the
best use of the land. The 21 townhomes, placed like patio homes
with picturesque, decorative landscaping, will provide very
generous green spaces. The planned private cul -de -sac, with
magnificent single family homes will be a stunning addition to
our community. The neighborhood will be much improved.
A member of the Heritage Committee assured the Planning
Commission at the February 28th meeting that the old church
building had no historical value; and suggested a pocket park
at the corner of 70th &Cahill Road. Mr. Clark stated he would
cooperate 100/ with the Committee in developing the Pocket Park.
The suggestion was to use only the stones from the buildings'
foundation to create a commemorative plaque. What a wonderful
idea! Visualize a small replica of the original church; perhaps
a little lighted stained glass built on the original stones;
and complimented by low growing landscaping. Who could object
t•o such a unique project?
I feel we are most fortunate to have the property developed
by a quality builder. We are all aware of Ron Clark's excellent
reputation. The 70th & Cahill corner needs this beautification.
Please! let the construction begin.
Respectfully,
U
Darliene McDonald
T t
la
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1990, AT 7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman, Gordon Johnson, Nan Faust, Robert Hale, Lee
Johnson, John Bailey, David Runyan, John Palmer, Geof
Workinger, Virginia Shaw, Helen McClelland
MEMBERS ABSENT: Charles Ingwalson
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner
Fran Hoffman, City Engineer
Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Commissioner Runyan moved for approval of the January 3, 1990 Edina
Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Workinger
seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried.
II. OLD BUSINESS:
Z -90 -1 Ron Clark Construction Inc., R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District
to PRD -3, Planned Residential District. Generally located south
& of West 70th Street and west of Cahill Road.
S -90 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval for Ridgewood Addition. Ron Clark
Construction Inc. Generally located south of West 70th Street
and west of Cahill Road.
Mr. Larsen began his presentation by clarifying for the Commission the notice
process for Planning Commission Meetings. Mr. Larsen explained at the present
time the notice requirement for single family subdivision requires the proponent
to notify single family property owners within 500 feet of the proposed
subdivision. This notification does not include owners of townhouses or
condominiums. Mr. Larsen noted that that is something staff, the Commission,
and Council Members may want to review. Mr. Larsen said before this requirement
no mailing notification for the Planning Commission hearing was required. State
Statute requires that notification be mailed to property owners within 200 feet
10 days before the Council meets to hear the proposal. Mr. Larsen pointed out
the City of Edina exceeds State Statute requirements.
Continuing, Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission that at its last meeting the
Commission voted to recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan from Quasi Public
to Medium Density Residential for the westerly portion of the proposed townhouse
development. The easterly portion of the proposed townhouse site is currently
shown as Medium Density Residential. The Commission also voted to accept the
recommendation of the Heritage Preservation Board to remove the Heritage
Preservation zoning on the old St. Patrick's church site. The Commission
continued the townhouse rezoning proposal and the proposed preliminary plat.
1
Mr. Larsen reported to the Commission the proponents have returned with a
revised plan in response to their criticisms. The plan continues to illustrate
13 single family lots and 25 townhouse units. However, changes in the location
of the townhouse buildings and the location and alignment of the road have
produced significant changes in the planned development.
Mr. Larsen concluded that Commission criticism of the townhouse development
focused on the transition from the westerly most building to the single family
lots. The revised plan improves this transition in three ways. First, the
building has been moved to the east approximately 25 feet. This was
accomplished by combining the three and four unit buildings on the east end of
the site into one seven unit building. Second, the westerly building is moved
down the hill providing an eight -ten foot grade separation from the single
family lot to the west. Third, the site plan proposes a dense planting of
evergreen trees to screen the different uses. Other elements of the development
remain the same as in the initial proposal. At 5.8 units per acre this would be
the lowest density multifamily development along Cahill Road.
Mr. Larsen explained that moving the townhouses to the east also benefits the
single family lots, especially lot 9. Lot nine now has a minimum depth of 150
feet. This shift along with the realignment of the street has eliminated all
variances, except those associated with lot 7. Lot 7 remains essentially the
same as in the initial proposal. Variances are requested from the minimum
street frontage requirement, the minimum lot width and lot width to perimeter
ratio are requested. Although lot 7 is a neck lot by definition, development of
the lot will not result in a poor relationship between this home and the homes
developed on adjacent lots. That is, it will not result in a home built in the
back yard of another home. The lot will be similar to some of the more
desirable lots in the southern portion of Dewey Hill 2nd Addition. With the
elimination of all other variances the improvements to lots 8 and 9, staff would
recommend the variances requested for lot 7. The layout and variances are
caused by the topography of the site.
Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note the recommended conditions to
Preliminary Approval:
1. Final Rezoning Approval
2. Final Plat Approval
3. Parkland Dedication - Cash in lieu of land
4. Developer's Agreement
5. Landscaping Bond
6. Investigation of the feasibility of developing a "pocket" historical
park at the corner of 70th and Cahill
The proponent, Mr. Ron Clark, Nancy Horn, Mike Gair, Mr. Clark's associates, and
interested neighbors were present.
Chairman G. Johnson asked Mr. Larsen if he believes there will be room for a
pocket park on the proposed site. Mr. Larsen said under consideration at the
present time is the possibility of locating the pocket park on the east side of
the street. He added renovation is taking place at King's Court and the
property owner has expressed interest in locating the park at this site.
2
Mr. Smithson, 5608 West 70th Street, questioned who has the authority to remove
the historic overlay district that exists on the Cahill site at the present.
Chairman, G. Johnson said the City Council has that authority. He added the
Historical Society and Heritage Preservation Board along with the Planning
Commission have recommended to the Council removal of the Heritage Preservation
Overlay District recommending in its place a "pocket park" and /or some form of
commemorative kiosk. Mr. Larsen said in Edina there are two groups who study
historic matters, (Historical Society and Heritage Preservation). Both Boards
have studied the proposal and have come to the conclusion that the site is what
is relevant, therefore they suggested the "pocket park ". Commissioner L.
Johnson said he has a copy of the Heritage Preservation Board Minutes and their
recommendation. Chairman G. Johnson asked that Mr. Nyberg's motion be read into
the minutes: HPB, Meeting, Tuesday, November 28, 1989. "Gary Nyberg then moved
to recommend to the Council that the church building be removed from the site
and a pocket park commemorating the historic Cahill Settlement be developed, the
park should incorporate the footings from the original 1884 church and be a part
of the developer's parkland dedication, Mrs. Wilder seconded the motion. Mr.
Palmer said the "pocket park" is something that the Commission can only express
ideas on and that the park idea should be investigated as part of the final
approval process. Commissioner L. Johnson asked if that motion would eliminate,
at least from the Heritage Preservation Board's point of view locating the
"pocket park" on the east side of Cahill. Mr. Larsen clarified that the City
Council, Heritage Preservation Board and the Historical Society have met on this
proposal and noted that the structure is not the original structure, therefore,
the area of the settlement is what is important. Mr. Larsen said it is his
understanding that the footings should be incorporated into the "pocket park"
Chairman G. Johnson clarified for Commission Members and public, staff's
recommendations for preliminary approval of this proposal: 1) final plat
approval 2) parkland dedication, 3) developers agreement, 5) landscape plan
review and inspection fee 6) investigation of a "pocket park" pursuant to the
recommendation of the Heritage Preservation Board.
Mr. Gair representing Mr. Clark asked Members of the Commission to note the
changes made to the previously submitted proposal. He pointed out the entire
townhouse development has been shifted to the east and the buildings have been
reoriented. This shift locates the townhomes down the hill and eliminates the
retaining walls. The exterior of the proposed townhouses would be brick and
stucco. Mr. Gair pointed out the density of the proposed townhouses is below
the density of townhouses in the immediate area.
Mr. Robert Morris, representing Mr. Clark went through for the Commission the
history of the traffic analysis that occurred on the site. He pointed out that
the ADT (Average Daily Trips) for the school total 1176. The proposed
development would have an ADT of 353 trips. Mr. Morris added that the proposed
land use change to a residential development would not have a negative impact on
traffic volume.
Commissioner L. Johnson asked Mr. Morris if he studied anything other than
traffic counts. Mr. Morris said he suggested a review of the driveway
placements. Mr. Hoffman concurred that the driveway situation on West 70th
should be reviewed and told the Commission he has spoke to representatives from
Mr. Clark about re- locating one of the driveways. Commissioner Faust said she
does not agree with the figures for traffic volume as it pertains to single
3
' , T
family homes. She asked Mr. Hoffman if he would concur with their numbers. Mr.
Hoffman said by his calculations the ADT would be 400 for residential land use,
he noted they have calculated an ADT of 353. Commissioner Shaw said the
topography is very difficult at the sight line where the driveway is located on
West 70th Street, and asked what is a good sight line distance. Mr. Morris said
that would depend on the speed of the vehicles. Mr. Hoffman said a good sight
line distance for that intersection would be 350 feet.
Mr. Smithson told the Commission he polled a majority of property owners in the
area and asked the Commission to note that they object to the high density
aspect of this proposal. Mr. Smithson submitted a petition opposing the
proposed development. Mr. Smithson added residents of the area want to see all
single family homes constructed and if that is unrealistic, on the east end they
would like to see developed low density residences similar to double bungalows.
He pointed out they do not want to see more townhouses. Single family homes
will protect residential property values while townhomes will have a negative
impact on their value. Continuing, Mr. Smithson said they want more of a
buffer and more landscaping.
Ms. Aksoy, 5600 West 70th Street told the Commission that it is her
understanding that Mr. Fynlayson wants to keep the church.
Ms. Hersey, 5501 Highpointe told the Commission that she counted cars on Cahill
and 70th Street. She added that on January 17, 1990 she counted 108 cars
between 1:10 -1:20 p.m. and 232 cars between 1:45 -2:30 p.m. Mr. Miles Hersey,
5501 Highpointe told the Commission he does not want to look at townhouse roof
lines, he added he would like to have a better buffer than the one at present.
He said Mr. Clark promised more plantings than the present lilac bushes. He
also pointed out he was told by Mr. Clark that the site the church is on has
historical significance and it would remain that way. Mr. Hersey reiterated
that he doesn't want to look at more townhomes, he wants a park, like the park
at 50th and Wooddale.
Mr. Burley, 7109 Lanham Lane told the Commission he has a concern with traffic
and the speed at which vehicles travel down West 70th Street. He said traffic
is a problem on West 70th Street and a high density development would just add
to the problem.
Mr. Ted Stein, 5524 West 70th Street told the Commission he wants the land
either left as it is, or developed into single family residences.
Mr. Burley, asked Mr. Larsen if the property has to be developed. Mr. Larsen
said the property is private and the City can only control how it is developed
or it has to buy it. Mr. Larsen added the City has no funds to acquire such a
large piece of property.
Commissioner Bailey said he wants to see the property developed as total single
family residential. He added if that is not possible, to at least consider
double bungalows on the east portion of the property.
Mr. Smithson asked if there could be protective covenants that would ensure that
if approved, the proposed townhouses and private homes would be owner occupied.
He also asked if there could be aesthetic restrictions put on the project. Mr.
Larsen said the City does not require the properties to be owner occupied. He
CA!
said the City would assume, because of the price of the units, that they would
be owner occupied. Mr. Larsen added the City does not control aesthetics, but
has control over the size and shape of the lots, entrance, exits, grading, water
control etc. for single family lots. The townhouse portion of the development
must be built exactly as approved by the Commission and City Council. This
includes building size, location, exterior materials and landscaping. Mr. Clark
indicated the price per unit would be between 245 -300 thousand and would be
owner occupied. After the townhouse units are occupied to a certain percentage,
control of the project is turned over to the association for their control.
Commissioner Shaw asked Mr. Clark what his answer is to the question raised by
Mr. Hersey on the church. Mr. Clark said at the time he constructed the
Highpointe project the site was historically protected and at that time the
property was not for sale by Mr. Everson.
Commissioner Runyan expressed confusion on what the neighbors in the area want
to see at this location. He asked if area residents want a park only where the
townhouses are proposed, or do they want something less dense than what has been
proposed. He noted that in his opinion area residents would be very favorable
to the single family home project. He added single family homes would be more
attractive to look at than the school building.
Mr. Gair, pointed out that on the Comprehensive Land Use Map shows the property
has been designated as medium density.
Commissioner McClelland said she realizes that the plan has been revised but in
her opinion it is too dense. She added she will not support development of a
neck lot or a substandard lot. Commissioner McClelland said residents have many
valid concerns, and in that area of Edina there is no shortage of townhomes.
She pointed out that area of Edina is saturated with high density developments
and it is not fair to the single family property owners in the area.
Commissioner McClelland said that she can not in good conscious support the
proposed development as presented. She indicated that every piece of property
in Edina does not have to be developed. She told the neighbors in the area that
there have been instances in the recent past where property owners in the
immediate area have gotten together to purchase property to protect it from
development. Commissioner Faust and Commissioner Bailey said they concur with
Commissioner McClellands comments.
Mr. Smithson, said Mr. Clark builds very beautiful single family homes and would
like to see him build more single family homes. He asked the Commission if Mr.
Clark develops single family homes to look favorably at variances that may be
needed.
Commissioner Johnson said he has a number of concerns his first being the site
distances which are unresolved and would have an impact on how the development
is laid out and graded. The retaining wall on Village Drive is bowing, and it
is still a new wall. that wall should be removed and the site should be sloped
at something less than 3 to 1. Secondly, he is in favor of the neck lot. He
pointed out that lot will probably be the most desirable lot in the proposed
plat. Commissioner L. Johnson said he does have a problem with lot 13 and upon
approval the Commission could say lot 13 would have to face 70th Street or face
east and have it's entrance on West 70th Street. A front yard facing rear yards
of other homes does not make sense. He added if the easement to lot 13 would be
5
r
allowed the driveway would be 250 foot driveway. Commissioner L. Johnson noted
that he has no problem with 13 lots, adding the single family aspect of the
proposal is very positive. Third, Commissioner L. Johnson said he would like to
see some sort of a slope easement at the erosion control fence point that would
be recordable. He added in a sense it would be a conservation easement, with no
grading or clearing of vegetation allowed in that area. Forth, townhouses would
be an acceptable land use if they would be constructed with 4 units, maximum, or
a smaller variation. Commissioner L. Johnson pointed out that the roof line
mass would probably be the same as single family homes. Commissioner L. Johnson
said he has a concern with the easterly portion of the property in that the
mature oak trees should be preserved. He added maintaining the oak trees and
siting the buildings to save them would create an open space feeling and would
give the area it's needed green space and park like atmosphere. Mr. Clark said
the retaining wall that is bowing was constructed by Mr. Findell. Mr. Clark
said if the retaining wall was removed and the grade reduced the townhouses
would be more exposed. Commissioner L. Johnson said the retaining walls on the
northwest corner of the townhouse site have about 18 feet of rotted retaining
walls and it could affect the water flow. Mr. Hoffman agreed that that
situation may result in too much water and he has spoken to Mr. Clarks people on
this situation. Mr. Hoffman said the wall is a concern and he is intending to
notify Mr. Findell regarding the wall. He added the wall could be washed away
and the Engineering Department is aware of that possibility.
Commissioner Shaw said she believes in buffering single family dwellings from
commercial with low or medium density residential, adding, the whole project
being single family doesn't make sense when the City has tried so hard to buffer
single family homes from commercial with this buffering of low to medium density
residential. Commissioner Shaw said maybe staff should consider more green
space for the area instead of the recommended cash in lieu of land. Chairman G.
Johnson said the City then would be responsible for maintaining the park like
area and would be an expense for the City that they may not be budgeted for.
Commissioner Shaw suggested that maybe the townhouse association could maintain
the park. Commissioner L. Johnson suggested that if Mr. Clark reduces the
density on the townhouse portion of the project and adds adequate landscaping a
park like atmosphere could be achieved.
Commissioner Workinger said he has not objection to the single family proposal
except for the development of lot 13 in regards to its easement. He also added
he really doesn't like the proposed neck lot but in regards to this proposal lot
13 is the one that causes the biggest concern. Commissioner Workinger added
with respect to the easterly portion, the townhouses, he feels the character and
symmetry of the neighborhood should be respected. He added he is bothered by
the density of the townhouse proposal, especially the middle portion.
Commissioner Workinger said regardless of the land size for the townhouse
proposal he feels a closeness and tightness with the layout of that aspect of
the project. Continuing, Commissioner Workinger said staff should work with Mr.
Clark to lessen the density of the project.
Commissioner McClelland moved to table the meeting until the meeting of February
28, 1990 allowing Mr. Clark time to respond to the issues raised at this
meeting. Commissioner Shaw seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
Z
EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JANUARY 31, 1990
Z -90 -1 R -1, Single Family to PRD -3, Planned Residential District.
Ron Clark Construction Company
0
5 -90 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval for Highcroft Addition.
13 Single Family lots and 25 townhouse lots.
At it last meeting the Commission voted to recommend amending the Comprehensive
Plan from Quasi Public to Medium Density Residential for the westerly portion of
the proposed townhouse development. The easterly portion of the proposed
townhouse site is currently shown as Medium Density Residential. The Commission
also voted to accept the recommendation of the Heritage Preservation Board to
remove the Heritage Preservation zoning on the old St. Patrick;s church site.
The Commission continued the townhouse rezoning proposal and the proposed
preliminary plat.
The proponents have returned with a revised plan in response to criticisms of
the Commission. The plan continues to illustrate 13 single family lots and 25
townhouse units. However, changes in the location of the townhouse buildings
and the location and alignment of the road have produced significant changes in
the planned development. These changes are detailed in the attached letter of
January 16, 1990, from Gair and Associates, site planning consultant for the
developer.
Recommendation:
Commission criticism of the townhouse development focused on the transition from
the westerly most building to the single family lots. The revised plan improves
this transition in-three ways. First, the building has been moved to the east
approximately 25 feet. This was accomplished by combining the three and four
unit buildings on the east end of the site into one seven unit building.
Second, the building is moved down the hill providing an eight -ten foot grade
separation from the single family lot to the west. Third, the site plan
proposes a dense planting of evergreen trees to screen the different uses.
Other elements of the development remain the same as in the initial proposal.
At 5.8 units per acre this would be the lowest density multifamily development
along Cahill Road.
Moving the townhouse to the east also benefits the single family lots,
especially lot 9. Lot nine now has a minimum depth of 150 feet. This shift
along with the realignment of the street has eliminated all variances, except
those associated with lot 7. Lot 7 remains essentially the same as in the
initial proposal. Variances are requested from the minimum street frontage
requirement, the minimum lot width and lot width to perimeter ratio are
requested. Although lot 7 is a neck lot by definition and development of the
lot will not result in a poor relationship between home and the homes developed
on adjacent lots. That is, it will not result in a home built in the back yard
of another home. The lot will be similar to some of the more desirable lots in
the southern portion of Dewey Hill 2nd Addition. With the elimination of all
other variances the improvements to lots 8 and 9, staff would recommend the
variances requested for lot 7. The layout and variances are caused by the
topography of the site.
CITY OF EDINA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 29, 1990
TO: Craig Larsen, City Planner
FR OM: Fran Hoffman City Engineer
�
SUBJECT: Site Concepts for Highcroft Project
Reference Site Revision 1 -10 -90
Following are my concerns regarding the subject project:
No. 1: Emergency overflow: The impact on private property should be
reviewed and done in another fashion.
No. 2: The most westerly townhouse parking lot drains south. Comment:
Developer has not had this reviewed preliminarily by Nine Mile
Creek Watershed staff. Staff is concerned about the amount of
runoff potentially leaving the site running onto the southerly
existing townhouse project.
No. 3: What is the stormwater design based on?
No. 4: Watermain and Sanitary Sewer Design: These should be reviewed
with an eye towards reducing the amount of City maintained
utilities.
No. 5: Review driveway openings for townhouse portion of project.
No. 6: Access for Lot 13 located between Lots 9 and 10 does not seem to
be appropriate. Would suggest restructuring access entrance be
oriented towards townhouse project with easement rights for
driveway purposes be granted for Lot 13 over the townhouse
driveway or have Lot 13 access from 70th Street.
GAI R & ASSOCIATES
Division of Kidde Consultants. Inc.
Site Design and Planning Consultants
January 16, 1990
Mr. Craig Larsen
Community Development Director
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
RE: Ron Clark Construction
Redevelopment of Montessori School Site
Dear Mr. Larsen:
On January 3, 1990, the City Planning Commission reviewed Ron Clark's proposed
redevelopment of property located at Cahill and 10th Street. Based on the
Commission's review and its recommendations, plans have been revised and were
reviewed on January 9, 1990 by yourself, Mr. Clark and his representatives.
With this letter, we are transmitting copies of the revised plans which include
site plan, landscape plan and grading plan.
The revised plans represent a superior design for the property affecting both
the townhome and the single family detached areas. The following is a statement
of factual changes and a recitation of the several plan alterations which have
enhanced the overall quality of the design.
1. The density of the single family and townhome areas are unchanged,
and in fact, are 1.5 units per acre for the single family detached,
and 5.8 units per acre for the townhomes. Both of these densities
are less than other similar developments within the area. In fact,
the townhome density is slightly less than the lower end of six units
per acre as defined by medium density by the City of Edina.
2. Changes made to the building location and orientation of the townhome
units on the extreme eastern portion of the site have resulted in
the easterly movement of all of the remaining townhome units. This
easterly shift provides for two very important design accommodations.
a. A 25 -foot increase in the depth of the single family lots
adjoining the townhouse component; and
b. An approximate 8 -10± grade ,separation between the townhomes
and the single family residential site pads.
2021 East Hennepin Avenue • Suite 250 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413
6121331 -8668 TWX:910- 576 -3111
3. In addition, a subtle, but important orientation change to the
easterly most seven units of townhomes has been made. The building
has been rotated slightly toward the southwest which provides a
better view and orientation of these units away from the southeast
which is more commercial.
4. The grading plans and landscape plans provide for a grade separation
and an evergreen landscape screen between the proposed townhome and
single family homesites. Although we recognize the benefit of the
grade separation and increased horizontal separation in tandem with
the heavy evergreen screen, the two housing types, are generally
compatibile in terms of the quality of architectural design and the
high cost of each of the housing types.
5. The single family lot l ayout has been reconfi gured by maki ng a number
of subtle changes which include:
a. repositioning the terminus of the cul -de -sac approximately 15
feet further west of its previous location;
b. shifting the east -west leg of the cul -de -sac north
approximately 10 feet, giving increased flexibility for pad
design on the south side of the cul -de -sac;
C. the entrance to the property from 70th has been shifted east
to accommodate the 150 foot lot depth, the median lot depth
within the designated single family detached neighborhood.
6. In the previously proposed plat layout, there were several lot width,
lot depth, perimeter ratio and lot area variances requested. The
revised preliminary plat seeks two variances, both of which affect
lot #7. The first is a lot width, and the second is a perimeter
ratio. All other lot area width and perimeter ratio requirements
- _ ---- - -- -�- -r ice_
As we have previously indicated, the proposed homesites have been
situated based upon preferred building pad locations. In other
words, the number of homes proposed within the subdivision are based
on preferential pad locations in contrast to traditional concepts
of land subdivision predicated on lot configuration and geometry.
The proposed redevelopment of this real estate is encumbered by extraordinary
costs related to the removal of existing buildings and the unusual costs
associated with building demolition and hazardous waste removal such as asbestos
found within the building. The proposed extent of redevelopment of this property
consisting of 25 townhomes and 13 single family lots are well within the density
of each of the respective uses and will not negatively impact the area or stress
the municipal infrastructure of the area.
Mr. Ron Clark has requested his architect provide technical site design input
in the form of building "footprints" for the single family lots in an effort to
demonstrate the suitability and feasibility of constructing homes on each lot
and in particular, those deemed more problematic because of slopes or existing
woodland. The revised grading plan design illustrates this development
feasibility.
The transition in the area of the townhomes has been greatly enhanced with
vertical - horizontal separation, as well as landscaping. The single family lots
located on the eastern portion of this site have depths of 150 feet, greatly
enhancing the rear yards of these units.
We enthusiastically offer these changes for your consideration and trust that
you will find them to be extremely positive modifications to the plan. If there
are any questions, concerns or other requests, please feel free to contact
myself.
Kindest regards,
:: L (_ C_
Michael J: Y r
Enclosures
cc: Ron Clark
Nancy Horne
Laurie McRostie
Don Stenzel
/lmt
UERorDN CO•IT(7p1 Y
} GRLVEL CONSTRUCTION 61Yi cilV.E V *�—,Wo—t EM TRLNCE W ENTRLNCE" TREET `�� nuuwuwmu qy I: -
�� ` J � � r• �r 'I i :�' 1 I { to l l° �o )o � trr
l
9.
Zcle
07DJ
� r �
1 �
/ va.• �s n bo..yL /.�i/ , .
LLI] LLj H
� alaa aa— ED R>an e.w.na.
t .a • .co011 "-v 4 :.. -
\ I'JMV 7Hr- 'lN�f1O1 `\ 1
4. —T —etO— easnws 11LTRJR_ Wk
S1 , }
Lo T _
a.
C
�. I flT !!.C! TTlC�I RlT lNpfER1p1 `T �c T.V
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
& EROSION CONTROL PLAN
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
5114 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD.
\ -- EDINA. IBM SBAOS _ !-ET
in
_ �_�. x;:71
_ - 0 25 so 100 150 Veer
13
!FF 12. weiz6va-rem
■ LANDSCAPE
1 _�
-malp
2.
10.
HIGH R,0 T I
3.
V,
Fy9hcrOf4
Circle
-5-
16.
0 .1
7.\
Y,
0
610
mom
Z,
1. �i/ SITE SUMMARY
/HIGHCROFT TOTAL SITE ACRES 12.8 AC.
SINGLE FAMILY ACRES 8.6 AC.
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 13 LOTS
GROSS DENSITY I.: AC UNITS/AC.
HIGHCROFT TOWNHOM ACRES 4. AC.
TOWNHOMES TOWNHOME UNITS 25 UNITS
2 CAR GARAGEPER UNIT
1 3 GUEST PARKING SPACES
• 400 SO.FT. USABLE OPEN SPACE PER UNIT
GROSS DENSITY 5.8 UNITS/AC.
9 Ft
0th STREET
5FT-T�01k VILLAGE DR.
��OMES I
".3 V
TF n FITFI
ffll-] L-J1�
I�M
10- --Ntxamm�m -T
ew-g4mE"-rzm of
FvCg4j-ELji -mm
SITE CONCEPT PLAN
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
3114 EDINA ;NOU TRIAL BLVD.
EDINA. UN ,,3:
imm*8 ussamin 3
--4-
,Q
,01
f<
M 0
4 11 r,,
.li r�l��
SHEET 3
OF 8
NORTH
0 25 30 100 ISO Fur
tvcc
r o. • ,. �,. —� D ?� ,Ot; ." 1L1YG� W TT�Fi.E.f'T , — — ' �S.TINO ,_.4 C � — —
—
IN �a1_
1� 3.. —
- — _
— -- E� 'STRE_ E
T
1 ]
— , •� `
O C
_
I g■.
Fff
ri
01
it
— 2.
,ts
■`/ I - I �/ Di / UI I
(GS \ ,, NC e o ��VILLAGE
3. i /-��\ �. .,fe; � :e 1 /� /� ���■ � I '' III
5. II� IIII 1 I
s.
\ \\
uLECaFS4D /
-
1
fiai -e i.NEa a. `1
I � / �� ! \JI I DO �/1TENAWE ►� �. '' - '' � � y - � —
IL Sl L o T
PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN _
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
- :114 E010 1NDUl
NN 70TNIAL eLYD.
DINA, .]0
` A NORTH
18
0 25 SO 100 150 FELT
U �}
U
'S1'G ItSw O'
cc
:Icy 12. 13. q
T I
u■ Ib'�° T
Do
o
10.
■ _ I 19 AcD° Z1 Tco, '
4.
// / �- ■ � \,\ � � D., ^_o��� III < < 7�\����� \„
11111
o
Y.
U
/ — W
( W. 0th STREET
HIGHCROFT-TOWNHOMES
P�
C J O ' S.
111_111 DR.
R
Lot Tabulation
lM ILLS MU UM WL �M�� el ll�ll ual�l
1 Iv ua' w• U ' le.em
I >•' ne• Hr• .0 a.Ne
1 u• no• ev .0 u.lm
e rn• n[' NT .v N.Im
r w' m o• m u.w
e Arc ue' ur .0 n.lm
1 IN• na' nr .0 u.rm
le IN I!I' NI' !• D.Im
II 10' Ile• Nr' n Il.lm
Ir lei' Ile' 1N' rl le. me
II IA' Ile' w' 11 Il.rm
PRELIMINARY PLAT
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
5114 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD.
EDINA, HN 55425 _
w� E LOMM`,
lO
II
Q
Development Summary
HIGHCROFT
HIGHCROFT TOWNHOMES
al
L
0-
SINGLE FAMILY ACRES 8.e AC
TOWNHOME ACRES 4.2 AC
J �
°■. J
SINGLE FAMILY LOT A0� REA 7.8 AC
TOWNHOME LOTS 25 LOTS
9 OF SITE
OUTLOT A
R.O. AC
mWNHOME UNIT! 2S
I
10- OF SITC
SITE AREA PER UNIT 7492 SO. FT.
S.F. LOTS 1S LOTS
LOT AREA PER UNIT 7490 SO. FT.
I
MIN. LOT SIZE Ie.e00 SOFT.
vUt �IN0 AREA 2159.5 SO. FT.
IIMAX
LOT SIZE 42.400 SOFT.
BUILDDIG COVERAGE 28.5%
MEDIAN IOT 21,700 SO. FT.
USEABLE SITE AREA PER •400 SO. FT
(
ZONED R -1
STE REZONE) D PRO -S
I
S[T9ACR STANDARDS NEIOHNORH000
ME II
rn4M= 414RT f0 STN 1
fETeACR TA'.ARDS
I
RM4 [41[ r4
• I'll t[' •O= AA[A • re.4W WIT.
GROSS DENSITY 1.5 UN /AC
n� Alro .e. A[o fo'
6R0S! DENSITY 5.8 IAN /AC
Y.
U
/ — W
( W. 0th STREET
HIGHCROFT-TOWNHOMES
P�
C J O ' S.
111_111 DR.
R
Lot Tabulation
lM ILLS MU UM WL �M�� el ll�ll ual�l
1 Iv ua' w• U ' le.em
I >•' ne• Hr• .0 a.Ne
1 u• no• ev .0 u.lm
e rn• n[' NT .v N.Im
r w' m o• m u.w
e Arc ue' ur .0 n.lm
1 IN• na' nr .0 u.rm
le IN I!I' NI' !• D.Im
II 10' Ile• Nr' n Il.lm
Ir lei' Ile' 1N' rl le. me
II IA' Ile' w' 11 Il.rm
PRELIMINARY PLAT
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
5114 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD.
EDINA, HN 55425 _
w� E LOMM`,
I iq
y1TE' f'FV I -1090
_ ]N!!1 4
OF NORTM v Q
O ZS SO 100 150 FEET
lO
II
Q
I
L
0-
J �
°■. J
I iq
y1TE' f'FV I -1090
_ ]N!!1 4
OF NORTM v Q
O ZS SO 100 150 FEET
a s,
7o- V, r, �
7411V �i
d.4,A
All- &1a4U4
z13 S
cb
L4 7.
V
RECEIVED JAN 3 1 1989
January 23, 1990
City of Edina
City Council & Planning Commission
4801 West 50th Street
Dear Sirs,
My wife and I are residents of Edina Highpointe, a condominium
complex at 5501 Village Dr. near- the the corner of 70th and Cahill.
We purchased our unit from the the builder-, Ron Clark Construction,
approximately five years ago. At that time we were told that the
property to the north, with the old school house, would remain
undisturbed because of it's historic significance. In fact all the
residents at Highpointe were told the same thing by Ron Clark:: when
they bought their units.
This is consistent with the situation to the south of our property.
We were told that we would have another condo just like ours so we
could share a caretaker, meeting rooms etc. This was changed to town
houses which left us high and dry both by the contractor and the city
which approved it. We don't intend to be run over again by
contractors or the city. The people who live at Highpointe are long
time residents in Edina and deserve better treatment than that.
Another issue is the traffic in that area. The addition of a high
density town house project in that location will further complicate
an already bad situation. It is very difficult to exit onto Cahill
during the rush hour periods.
Please reconsider this proposal and look at other alternatives such
as a park similar to the one on 50th St. across from the Golf Course.
Respectfully,
1
7989
Lowell Swanson
5501 Village Drive
Edina MM 55435
January 18, 1990
Edina Planning Commission
Edina City Hall
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Dear Commissioners:
We are writing to you as concerned neighbors and property owners surround-
ing the proposed sub - division on West 70th Street, to be developed
by Ron Clark.
We strongly feel the single family home concept is being destroyed in
this southwest Edina neighborhood. There are already too many condo-
miniums and townhouses in this area. Has the City Planner and Planning
Commission given serious thought to what a single - family neighborhood
should really be?
It seems southwest Edina does not receive the same consideration
regarding development as east Edina (i.e., the Wooddale school property -
now a park).
We object to the planned overcrowding of single family homes on this
site and the large number of townhomes designated for the rest of the
property. Why not more single family homes and less townhouses? Where
is the green space in this development? Why doesn't Ron Clark have
to donate some of his property for green space like other builders in
this area have done?
We believe there should be no variances allowed for this property.
As neighbors and property owners we also would like to know why the
City Planner is so anxious to push this project through without looking
at the long range effects on southwest Edina?
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours very truly,
C,411 L ,4/Y hS4 /L1
�et„►o� —
704U_
J l
-7 X33
/ —/�7 ''/,�
11 3 nnuar .���
or. "reg S. Richards
rhairman, .~ousing and
Reoevelopment Authorir-/,
7225 Fleetwood Drive
Edina, MN, 55435
Dear Mr. Richards,
I own a condominium unit in Highpointe, whicn faces
the old St. Pat's Church at 70th & Cahill.
Although I am not an original owner in this 3 year old
building, [ bought my unit on the assurance from current
residents sno Merrill w)nch that the ex-church property was
"Heritage" sno could nct be developeo. As s homeowoe' W
2dfna for 2� years, my wive ano 1 would not nave p'/'noased
nere ir we "ad known tnar our "front yacU^ was 00 he
deveioped.
Adding insult to injury, the man who plans to oevelop
the St. Pat property is none other than Ron Clark, the
builder who, I'm told, assured all the original buyers at
Highpointe, that nothing COULD EVER be built or changed
across the atreet.
I be1ieve that it is an article of bad fairn cn the
part of the City of Edina to allow this property no cecome
'esidential. I sincereiy hope that you agree with zhis
position, sid will let tne 70th & Cuniil remain a Herivage
site, and perhaps Necone anorher of our lovely :=� narks'
Sincerely Yours,
I- VJWIDk
ANTHONY ---) 'ROTH
Unit #303, HIGHP0144'
f501 Village Drive
Edina, M, W*3�
CGLI r� C" � �� . G -cd�. v+'Yr'-�`,.'. "' "%'i2-r ✓Lt,.v2c�� -,
y �D l (�•�' 5-4'
�(i- •�•G•ta.G �iLr�LL
,Ig- Efa� -� i- ic�ryC ZC�.
4 2GL i coLrwc+�sG.�
�� ,yz -u�.e �•yi
e.s2.�i Q "r.cc( GL •�y'Lta�.C���
Gl / ,i T .�L?'-G[•�i ;/l/f.Ls•� -.y y GZ ! .C:�C14
' `�i 4: �c G • ✓-t'L� - �"��L2 / mfr -
_
L 7G,T1 . Cpc: -l�zee
B.GVV C'en.C�.�vr...c -ce.h
G� ,ZLy..cfC ..L -u.ti� Cc'-t' C � /LL��-G L•
�i't/L . GLU- GZ�cc "t•C•�C - �'•- �:�irv�r rq' -�Lfiy G.�''V�� 0� e-L,
ell 27,
`` � "� " U �:,ZG,rIYV� -t !fit •C ���`�(' �'
r VJ
� U �
/ ww"
January 16, 1990
City of Edina
Planning Commission
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, A1N 55424
Gentlemen:
I am writing to you to express a serious objection to the contemplated
construction of townhouses on the corner of Cahill Road and 70th Street.
Prior to expressing myself, I would like to identify myself as a long-
term resident of Edina, previously living on West Shore Drive and
presently living at the Edina Highpointe, a condiminium constructed
by Ron Clark. We have been there for approximately 3z years. I have
never contacted the city with any complaints, have quietly lived in
the community, paid our taxes, and enjoyed Edina.
Some time ago when we considered moving in Highpointe, we talked about
future construction possibilities with Ron Clark and his sales assist-
ants, as we did not want to move into a community that was being swallowed
up completely by townhouses, condiminiums, and other forms of construction.
At that time he assured us that the following events would not occur.
One, that the townhouse cluster to our immediate south would not be a
townhouse facility whatsoever, but would be a twin building to the
construction identical to Highpointe and talked about the promised amenities
common outside picnic facilities, etc., painting, at least in our minds,
a very nice picture of what was going to transpire. In addition to the
north where the present Montessori school now stands, he emphatically
told us that the school, the old St. Patrick's Church, was going to be
preserved as an historical structure within the city, and we needn't
worry about the blight of further construction in that direction. Now
it seems all of this is blowing up in our face, promises conveniently
forgotten, and perhaps we were naive enough to be taken in by one very
glib Ron Clark.
I feel very much like I have been duped into buying the present facility
where we now live, and intended to live for our entire retirement. I
ask now that the entire planning commission be given a copy of this
letter so they can see and know firsthand from myself and others the
series of broken promises and innuendoes and assurances that have all
been breached. This is not the city of Edina that I have learned to
know and love in the past. I am afraid it is turning into a nest of
opportunism, devisiveness, and I am very disappointed to see this
developing. My plea is pure and simple, preserve the Montessori
building as is, and give us some semblance of non - commercial environment
in our surroundings.
Very truly yours,
W. D. ,Johnston
I
3, /1
It
_LC
TL LC Feel, t,
7c, of
c
4-"w L
A--e
�� j••'� $E:tY�� JAN 171989
. Lam/..: s- �:.v�,� l r^ •as�r�.� �s� • _• � —
�-- ��... � 1• • ••.err- c�- rc..,c..:_ ' � -s• -�. G .:..r- G- �c.c.c.. -s..
�.• G., /._ _ � _ a_w C.. �� mil• / -
Ac-
i•
-ICA L
r
• Cam' -
B.
ODD K ROVICN
5501 VILLAGE DR 1305
tt EDINA. MN 55435 J G�
Ss _
Edina Planning Co.=issior.
City I:all
1•;est 50th Stree-
Dear Commissioners:
i
J
S
r
3
d
i
v.c believe there should be no variances allotred for this property.
's neighbors and property owners we also would like to know why the
City Planner is so anxious to push this project through without looking
3t the long ranee effects on southwest Edina?
—,an','. you for your consideration.
Yours very truly,
1•,e are writing to you as concerned neighbors and property owners surround-
ing the proposed sub - division on nest 70th Street, to be developed
'
by Ron Clark.
•s
r
s`
We strongly feel the single family home concept is being destroyed in
i
this southwest Edina neighborhood. ':Here are alreadv too many condo-
miniums and townhouses in this area. Has the City Planner and Planning
Commission given serious thought to what a single - family_ neighborhood
-�
should really be?
It seems southwest Edina does not receive the same consideration
regarding development as east Edina (i.e., the Wooddale school property -
:i
now a park).
;e object to the planned overcrow:dinc of single family homas on this
site and the large number of townhomes designated for the rest of the
-
property, V.-hy not more single family homes and less to; nho.:ses? 1-:here
is the green space in this development? 1:'hy doesn't Ron Clark have
to donate some of his property for green space like other builders in
this area have done?
i
J
S
r
3
d
i
v.c believe there should be no variances allotred for this property.
's neighbors and property owners we also would like to know why the
City Planner is so anxious to push this project through without looking
3t the long ranee effects on southwest Edina?
—,an','. you for your consideration.
Yours very truly,
'7 ii;n 1990
Edina Planning C',)mmirz!:i,)n
Edina City Hall
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55434
Dear Commissioners:
We are writing to you as concerned neighbors and property owners
surrounding the proposed sub - division on West 70th Street, to be
developed by Ron Clark Construction.
We strongly feel the single family home concept is being destroyed
in this southwest Edina neighborhood. There are already too many
townhouses in this area. The office and industrial development in
the southwest quadrant of 70th Street and Highway 100 has already
made drastic changes to the congestion, noise, traffic and speeds
in the neighborhood and the development continues, now threatening
to wipe out the last buffer protecting the neighborhood.
The neighbors would like the same consideration given residents in
the Wooddale area. Highpoint residents invested given assurances
that the east end of the parcel had historical significance and
"no buildings would be erected ". The contractor retreats from
these assurances. Single family residents invested with the
prospects of an Edina elementry school for children to attend and
are now faced with encroaching higher density units which lessen
the desirability and value of our homes. The higher density
townhomes proposed violate the word and spirit of the
Comprehensive Plan by failing to "maintain and protect the single
family neighborhoods' and having more than "4 units per building ".
We object to the proposed over - crowding of single family homes on
the west end of the parcel. Originally, 8 of 13 required
variances to the just- approved rules. The emphasis of the
contractor's presentation was the "seclusivity" of the cul de sac
(with unnatural easements) rather than a single family development
which integrates with the existing single family neighborhood via
additional access off 70th Street. For the east end of the
parcel, open green space, single family residences or a moderate
number of duplex units is consistent with the low density buffer
defined in the Comprehensive Plan for both the existing homes to
the north and west on 70th. Single family homes should be the
dominant housing. Without more single family, the buffer is gone.
The proposal lacks green space as does the Highpoint development.
A few trees and landscaped berms are not a substitute for land
buffer required by single family properties to protect our
investments and aid ongoing efforts to regain the neighborhood
with such progress as that made concerning traffic.
We are fundamentally opposed to the multi -unit townhomes
regardless of how the calculated density compares with recent
hodgepodge of developments to the south. The Comprehensive Plan
states the maximum density will be influenced by the surrounding
single family densities! That's about 2.0, not 5.8!
Very ,.ruly yours, ,arc
��:G��' N/ • �C % S-i �O. ivy
lif..a/•csr�/� _
1. Comprehensive Plan: Maintain and protect single family
detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use in Edina.
2. Comprehensive Plan states there will be transitional use or
buffer between single family homes and higher densities:
a. to existing single family neighborhoods
b. to proposed 13 single family homes.
3. Low Density (0 -6 DU /Acre) is stated as the housing type for
buffers, not medium density (6 -12 DU /Acre) as recommended.
a. medium density must be extensively buffered: natural
features, linear open space corridors, lower density
transitional uses.
b. the low density carries a maximum of 4 dwelling units
per structure!
c. "low density to be influenced by surrounding single family
densities.
d. adequacy of berms, retaining walls, landscaping, size of
transplantable trees...
k�
4. Contractor commitments to Highpointe buyers:
a. Second building, greenspace and amenities
b. No structures would be built to tt.�: North even if Church
disappeared
5. True status of the church building, foundation and land - -there
are on -going discussions among the Historical Society members,
Heritage Preservation and Park Board Members ?
6. Environmental Protection -- underground fuel tank, sweating,
leakage to be determined by Phase 1 and Phase 2 Audits results
determine if ground contamination remedies are required.
7. Surrounding Neighborhoods overwhelmingly object to the
townhomes and accompanying density as the proposal for this
property.
54to
90
2.0 U14ITG /ACRF,, _-
i
1.8 NI S /ACRE I
UNITS /ACRE
= IuORHOOD
1N-Df \RY LINE
I 1 Ilu„
tit)
z
rw
�o �7
LU to 1
1-7.a�fI11=".11 4' 111
o R-1
Nil r r 1
eo
41
I GQEEIL �JPEW
901, nnn3 ,� 1� y 18 �--
1 \I I �� 1� ►�' le, - I ZC,�N� ►,,P
oD K 0
I ` � " -ry1 0
�u -
_ 70TH STREET �'-'- - - -�
-t WEJT
'7777-7- �n P
- o
�.. 71' I1nn� �n-a IMrnl 121011•\/
�: ffVi ll.L
`TOWoHOME �t-V'S ` �,J
j GOUKL
GROSS DE b�i-?AC
45- ! SINGLE FAMILY �� fTl.n
24 n r�1�1,�_t 1
✓SO
Too {,1hr, • MAN A& LOT 22,87 60FT. W . Li -J ! '
/ �..JJ _ WAR lUINT [l i �Pf'INy
kA+Ikk A� LOT 21,700 SOFT. LENTER 1 1
_ E
00
i�SoJ:O Ir,InO/ 6ROS� DENSRY.I.S {IN %11C `. `:.� I q Jl
n
-� �'
L. J Lu L11 4
LL
Izz
n °- -a I
.�\ ,- 3, r rr YI
------------
1..dr,u
vr-.
aw i,irs.
Pi.m. Hp•bo--v
�ovv v.. t,.!w
Pir.
arKi firs.
ioreriCe L. becKer
k)tn Street
ytt
P:r•.
arto firs.
Dennis beltrana
halo' M. 70tn Street
yes. MaIlvO
am ht's.
liavlo V. berern)-Al
j=tii hebuire mvilu
v em
t
crio mn:.
Vr'-jL:e o. zrVO�-r:C-Tt
r ru PITS.
�LEiVr'05 L-6rjjj+.ej-.
f Q . I i , vt- V,3 I i tfv L I r'C i E
Yet>
znr,j(.e C.
Liu -1 svr:
:r:_
cif
6N0 Kf-b.
titer UQUKalma-
jivo W. '100 Street
yes
hr.
aroo Mr-S.
j,:,rn Couiliaro
iii W. 'O'An Street
v eS
mr.
arto lhf,5.
M,Juert -urle
-.0-A !--buire "a.
yes
P..".
wo-3 llir°.
nwzbeli J. UciriiEi�
ivi ftc:LllIte no.
ve5
Pir.
ano Mrs,
flubSeli J. iidweis
:J-ijj P-K:bulre MO.
yes
arlJ
Wllil8M M. UOet)KL
-/vUl -Aveet
ZI r 1 W. 1) u I I v
Y1 Larirlaw LanE
ved
InE
Lclf'bL-r1/ rioNe ILL' rdlilliv
13 Lee valley CirciE.
Yes
6W f,r•Q-.
CL rjl.ZLjdVlCK
^]1J Lip.jeriCK Lane
ves
ar)U t':r!--.
revtJIr.3tiU rr'leOLri
I Llf r va I I eV Lit Cie
ves
Lf.6t Jut Ll.
LC-11C
-----------
1..
•.rs.
(9 rz.
m i c n d r a 1. of tf! t t- n
—WIcIM Lefle
V tI3
ELizauetn
J. nQvve
jalJ
I'Ujulre ru.
yfe--
,ir.
arK) Mrs.
i0ou muteDsener
i
fc6ulve
b. ioeibruo
iQIj
Lee YaLley Circle
res
Vicv
N. I-An street
yes
r.
isno Pi•--.
Zale junr6on
IVCi
Lee VdIIVY Clf'Cie
yes
oIfU
r- LaUF'VfFCe WHIM &I
t ivy,
�cmrjaffi Lishe
Yvb
am Pirs.
Hlarl j(jnrf5tC-n
56io
W. Mtn atreet
velz
artu Arb.
bale P.jtorC-ntKl
t 04
W. iiot n Street
Yes
ar93 ArS.
mer$Lnei c. Kitcner,
7W4
Larmiao Lane
yes
aria :I,t,s.
uefte hf,aQrtess
w. 7%.,tn zLreet
yes
r.
arpO Ars.
nAert 1. ildlev
'JOIC,
vimiuire nU.
yes
atoo P;fs.
hell r, il RcLout
f �iz J
Lee valiev Lircle
Yes
PatrICIa
L. Oiartoer
76ki
LE-- valley Circle
vt:S
ariCi Nf'S.
7...uert R. wimorm
I I Ift.10
Lilfffic& LCOle
vet
arm v°f5.
juadtnan rriler5vn
I VC 2
LdItncill) Lilfle
Y. eb
anu Px,.n.
rea keu
J 31b
Pic6ulr -e mu.
Yes
•
t!-- mlUiL-v
_tiro
Lf'-rP,. YlLM Ljr!t:
YLb
ez
1 2
------------
Oir.
jfIJ PlUt.
-IL;AL 31111tri
[Vic
Lee YdLLtfY
Fir•.
aria Firs.
�tepoeri H. Saitcisor,
;600
W. 70til atilvet
Mr.
ano Mrs.
i'ea Steen
55c4
M. 700 otrvet
yes
tor.
aria hf--s.
Lidrvrice SteinDaCK
-,:k6
vani•e mo.
yt?5
rr.
jdint?t) H.
otL-veri
. (Vknl
Lee YaLley Lircie
yet)
F; r.
aria Firs.
ire -,tevefi!,
j7c"l
W. t)w otreet
yes
Fir,.
ano hfs.
'O'teverib
- livi
Latrna® Ldfle
yet
Ij!..
alla fart).
Wayne z)uriuuerfj
:Di-
Pic-oulre Iu.
hr'.
untJ FNF-b.
nu.
V:t.
I-In" r,
Hal-0
j i v4
Pic-buire mo.
4t=
Mr.
jjrja ,,r*,
neim wart Lela
Ct'eeKVItfF, Lord
eS
Mr.
onavor, vourio
0716
hiiiblCle Lone
vrS
,
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON JANUARY 3, 1989, AT 7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Gordon Johnson; Helen McClelland, John Palmer,
Nan Faust, Robert Hale, Lee Johnson, Charles Ingwalson,
David Runyan, Geof Workinger, Virginia Shaw
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Bailey
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner
Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary
I. NEW BUSINESS:
Comprehensive Plan Quasi - Public to Single Family Residential and
Amendment Quasi Public to Medium Density Residential
Z -90 -1 R -1. Single Family to PRD -3, Planned Residential
District. Also repeal of Heritage Preservation
District from easterly 300 feet of site, at the
southwest corner of West 70th Street and Cahill
Road
S -90 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval for Ridgewood Addition,
Ron Clark Construction, Cahill School Site
Repeal Heritage Preservation Overlay District
Mr. Larsen noted that there are several actions required by this proposal. He
began his presentation by discussing them in the following order:
Comprehensive Plan Amendments:
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the Comprehensive Plan designates most of
the site as Quasi Public. This designation includes churches, private schools,
golf courses, and cemeteries. The easterly 300 feet of the site is designated
Medium Density Residential. This designation includes townhouses and low -rise
apartment buildings in a density range of 6 -12 dwelling units per acre. Except
for Lewis Park the entire west Cahill Road frontage from 70th to 78th Streets is
designated Medium Density Residential. The underlying zoning of the entire site
(12.8 acres) is R -1, single family. The City did, in 1982, approve a
preliminary rezoning of the easterly 2.1 acres of the site to allow a two story,
22 unit apartment building. The proposed development suggests expanding the
Medium Density designation to the west, along 70th Street, approximately 480
feet. The remainder of the site would change from Quasi - Public to Single Family
Residential.
1
• '1 , t
Mr. Larsen stated that the area proposed for Medium Density Residential makes
sense and should be approved. The area corresponds almost exactly to the
adjacent townhouse and condominium developments and other Medium Density
Residential developments to the south along Cahill Road. The change from
Quasi - Public to Single Family Residential should also be approved. It provides
the most appropriate relationship with the park to the south and the single
family lots to the west.
Heritage Preservation District:
Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note the minutes from the November 28, 1989,
meeting of the HPB, Heritage Preservation Board. Mr. Larsen added this meeting
was held following a joint meeting between the City Council, The Heritage
Preservation Board, and members of the Edina Historical Society on November 22,
1989. The purpose of the joint meeting was to discuss the future of Old St.
Patrick's Church. It is the Board's recommendation that the building be removed
from the site and the history of the Cahill settlement be marked by a pocket
park.
Mr. Larsen recommended that the Commission recommend to the Council repeal of
the Heritage Preservation District overlay zoning.
Rezoning:
Z -90 -1 Rezoning, R -1, Single Family to PRD -3, Planned Residence District
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the proposed rezoning concerns the easterly
arm of the site. It measures approximately 780 feet along east -west axis and
240 feet along the north -south axis. The site area is 4.3 acres. The proposal
calls for 25 townhouse units arranged in five buildings. The proposed density
is 5.8 units per acre. A comparison to other townhouse densities along Cahill
follows:
Village Drive Townhomes (immediately south on Village Drive) - 8.3
Units /Acre.
x Highlander I Townhomes (Cahill at Amundson) 7.8 Units /Acre
T` Cahill of Edina (Cahill at 74th) - 9.7 Units /Acre
Mr. Larsen pointed.out three of the proposed buildings contain single story
walkout units, and the other three are two story units. The average size of the
main floor of each unit is 2,160 square feet, which includes an attached two -car
garage. Exterior materials are stucco and brick.
Mr. Larsen explained the townhouse development meets or exceeds the following
Ordinance requirements: lot area per dwelling unit; building coverage; building
height; usable lot area; and the number of units per building. The plan meets
all setback requirements except for the side street setback for unit eight.
Unit eight provides a 23 foot setback from Village Drive. Since Village Drive
is a public street, the required setback is 35 feet. Thus, a 12 foot side
street setback variance is requested. With this one exception the plan meets
all requirements of the PRD -3 District.
4
The proposed development also requests preliminary plat approval for the 25 lots
and one common outlot. The proposed plat complies with the requirements of the
City Subdivision Ordinance.
Mr. Larsen concluded that assuming the required amendment of the Comprehensive
Plan, staff recommends approval of Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Plat.
He also recommended granting the one variance requested, the 12 foot side street
setback variance for unit eight. Unit eight is separated from the street by a
retaining wall and is several feet higher than the street with no access to the
street.
Mr. Larsen recommended the following conditions to preliminary approval:
1. Final Rezoning Approval
2. Final Plat Approval
3. Parkland Dedication
4. Developer's Agreement
5. Landscape Plan review and inspection fee
6. Investigation of a "pocket park" pursuant
Heritage Preservation Board.
to recommendation of the
S -90 -1 Preliminary Plat APRroval Ridgewood Addition, 13 Single Family Lots
The proposal is to redevelop 8.5 acres of the Cahill School site with 13 single
dwelling unit lots. Twelve of the lots would front on a new public street cul
de sac off of West 70th Street. One lot, Lot 11, would front on West 70th
Street.
Neighborhood:
Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note the neighborhood for comparison purposes
is illustrated on sheet five of the submittal. It includes all developed single
family lots within 500 feet of the proposed subdivision. The median dimensions
and sizes for the defined neighborhood are:
Lot width: 110 Feet
Lot depth: 150 feet
Lot area: 16,800 square feet
Mr. Larsen pointed out Section 14, (b) of Ordinance 804, the Subdivision
Ordinance, establishes the above lot dimensions and lot area as minimums for all
lots in the proposed subdivision. Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to refer to
their staff report to review the corresponding dimensions and lot areas for the
13 lots proposed. Mr. Larsen said lot areas or lot dimensions which fall below
these minimums are marked with an asterisk. Lots falling below any of the
minimums would require a variance.
Lot # Lot Width
1 113'
2 113'
3 115'
Lot Depth Lot Area
132' 14,784*
125' 15,525*
176' 21,440
3
• � T
4
115'
392'
60,160
5
115'
327'
33,800
6
94'*
280'
36,400
7
34'*
315'
40,000
8
110'
162'
19,800
9
110
135'*
15,250*
10
145'
130'*
21,700
11
178'
124'*
22,250
12
150'
146'
21,609
13
130'
145'
19,980
Lot Width To Perimeter Ratio:
Mr. Larsen explained that Section 14(b) (4) requires that each lot have a lot
width to perimeter ratio of 0.1 or greater. One lot in the proposed
subdivision, No. 7, has a ratio of less than 0.1, its ratio is 0.04. Thus, a
variance to the required ratio is requested.
Mr. Larsen concluded the proposed subdivision requests several variances to the
requirements of Section 14 (b) of Ordinance No. 804. Specifically, lot width
variances for lots 6 and 7. Lot depth variances for lots 9, 10, and 11, and lot
area variances for lots 1, 2 and 9. In addition lot 7 would require a variance
from the lot width to perimeter ratio requirement. In staff's opinion the most
significant variances are the two variances required by lot 7. If lot 7 is
removed from the plat all significant variances will be eliminated. An
additional benefit will be a reduction in the amount of disturbance to the areas
of steep slopes and dense vegetation.
Mr. Larsen summarized for the Commission the recommended actions: They are as
follows::
* Amend Comprehensive Plan from Quasi Public to Single Family Residential
and Medium Density Residential.
* Repeal Heritage Preservation Overlay Zoning.
a° Preliminary Rezoning Approval for 25 unit townhouse development.
* Preliminary Plat approval for Ridgewood Addition subject to elimination
of Lot 7.
The proponent, Mr. Ron Clark, Nancy Horn, project manager, Mike Gair, Architect
and Marsh Iverson were present. Interested neighbors were present.
Mr. Gair began his presentation by outlining Mr. Clark's history as a developer.
He pointed out Mr. Clark has developed many projects in Edina including
Highpointe, Edina Highlander, Gleason Court and various single family
residences. Mr. Gair added Mr. Clark has been successful as a developer because
he acquires the property then develops, markets, and constructs on those
properties. Continuing, Mr. Gair said he began working with Mr. Clark on the
proposed project in June of 1989, and on August 22, 1989, held a neighborhood
meeting advising them of the upcoming proposal. He added because of the
moratorium on subdivision of single family lots within the city the project was
unable to go forward until the moratorium was lifted, which was in December of
4
1989. Mr. Gair noted that a notice of the proposal and this meeting was mailed
to single family property owners within the neighborhood. This mailing list was
provided by City staff and a interested neighbor.
With graphics Mr. Gair explained the ingress and egress for the development. He
pointed out that all curb cuts are on West 70th Street. The existing curb cuts
on Cahill Avenue will be removed. Mr. Gair continued, adding, at the present
time the existing land use is a Montessori Day Care Center which operates a full
time Montessori Day Care Program and a K -7 Montessori school. He added the day
care operates 12 months a year with an enrollment of 200 students. He pointed
out during the summer months the amount of students drops to 150. He further
added that the K -7 school has 137 students during the nine month school year and
70 students during the summer. The staff employed by the school is 35. Mr.
Gair pointed out that the Edina School District leases office space at the
Montessori School Building with a staff of 30 employees. Mr. Gair said the
present ADT (Average Daily Traffic) at the site is 1176 trips. The proposed
residential change will result in an ADT of 353 trips. Chairman G. Johnson
asked Mr. Larsen if the City Engineer, Fran Hoffman, would agree that the
proposal would generate this significant of a reduction in traffic flow. Mr.
Larsen said Mr. Hoffman would concur. Mr. Larsen pointed out that single
family neighborhoods of this size would generate less traffic than those of the
current day care /private school.
Mr. Gair continued his presentation by pointing out the 13 house sites. He
added topography played a role in how the single family dwellings were laid out.
He said seven sites were situated on the sloped area creating nice building pads
and six sites were located on the flat area. Mr. Gair said he understands City
staff does not look favorably on flag lots (lot #7). He presented to the
Commission a revision to the proposal which has three lots accessing the cul de
sac versus the original proposal of two lots. This revision will eliminate the
non - conforming lot width of lots 6 and 7.
Mr. Gair addressed the townhouse proposal explaining that three of the proposed
buildings contain single story walkout units, and the other three buildings are
two story units. He added the townhouses will be constructed of brick and
stucco. Mr. Gair pointed out that landscaping for the proposed townhouses would
be substantial.
Commissioner Faust said she has a problem with the proposed density of the
townhouse units in relation to the proposed single family lots. She said Edina
usually tries to buffer its single family homes from medium to high density
housing with doubles or open space. Commissioner McClelland agreed with
Commissioner Fausts observation and added that the middle section of the
proposed townhouse development appears too dense. Mr. Larsen said in his
opinion the townhouse proposal needs to be reviewed as a whole, not in its
proposed individual sections. Commissioner Faust commented that she also has a
hard time approving a new development that requires variances. She pointed out
this is the first test of the new subdivision ordinance and to already have a
proposal that requires variances is a concern. Mr. Larsen indicated that the
revised plan proposed this evening by the proponent eliminates the lot width
variances which were previously required by lots 6 and 7.
Commissioner McClelland noted that the lack of a grade differential between the
proposed townhouses and the single family residential lots also poses a concern.
19
She said in her opinion a real problem is lot 9. She observed the elevation and
proximity to the townhouses make it an undesirable lot.
Commissioner Palmer told the Commission that even though the establishment of
the new subdivision ordinance has been accomplished; it is still to be used as a
guide that affords the Commission and Council flexibility and judgement to
determine if a proposed development as a whole makes good planning sense. He
pointed out it is the job of the Commission to review the ordinance along with
the Comprehensive Plan and with these guides make an educated decision and pass
it along to the Council with our views and recommendation.
Commissioner Runyan questioned Mr. Gair if lot 11 would be accessed off West
70th Street. Mr. Gair explained that lot 11 would be accessed off the cul de
sac by a private easement through lots 10 and 9. Commission Members expressed
concern over this situation. They indicated they do not want a private
easement over lots 9 and 10 to provide access to lot 11. Commissioner
McClelland pointed out that it is unfair to the future property owners, and does
not make good planning sense. Commissioner L. Johnson asked Mr. Clark if the
house on lot 11 would front on West 70th Street. Mr. Clark said the house would
front on West 70th Street with a rear loading garage.
Commissioner L. Johnson said in his opinion he does not find lot 7 as previously
proposed to be an unreasonable development site, and added the configuration of
lots 9,10,11, and their relationship to the townhouses along with the grade of
the property to be a concern of this proposal. He observed that it may be
possible to relocate the row of townhouses nearest the single family lots at the
toe of the slope. Thus creating a wider buffer between the single family lots
and the townhouse development. Commissioner L. Johnson suggested another
possibility to achieve proper spacing would be to reconfigure the proposed
dwellings around a loop road versus the proposed cul de sac. Commissioner
McClelland commented that she feels the proposal will work better if the single
family home sites were fewer. She added 12 lots instead of the proposed 13
would provide better development pads for lots 9,10, and 11, and eliminate the
needed driveway easement for lot 11. Commissioner McClelland pointed out Edina
has traditionally tried to keep a wide buffer between single family dwellings
and multiple dwellings and this proposal as presented does not maintain the
desired buffer and grading.
Commissioner Workinger said while the density of the townhouse project is less
than the surrounding townhouse, in his opinion it appears tight and as presented
just "doesn't feel right ". He added the feeling of tightness may be a result of
the topography. Mr. Gair said when he first viewed the proposal he had the same
feeling, but added, when he walked the site and experienced the topography the
feeling of crowding disappeared. He told the Commission the proposed plan works
very well in reality.
Chairman G. Johnson said he has trouble with the driveway easement for lot 11.
He added that is something he would recommend the proponent to redesign.
Commissioner Ingwalson agreed with Chairman G. Johnsons observation regarding
the driveway easement.
Commissioner Palmer told the Commission that he agrees there are aspects of the
proposal that need to be revised but added he finds no problem in recommending
to the Council amending the Comprehensive Plan and removing the Historic Overlay
3
. , . '
District from the site. A discussion ensued with the Commission in agreement
with Mr. Palmer. Commissioner McClelland proposed that the rezoning and
subdivision aspect of the proposed project be held over until the next Planning
Commission meeting. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Clark if he has a
deadline for construction to begin on this development. Mr. Clark said that he
would like to see the legal process move as quickly as possible. He pointed out
there has been a considerable wait as a result of the subdivision moratorium and
at the present time the school building is not being utilized, so the wait is
becoming expensive.
Commissioner Palmer moved to recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan from
Quasi Public to Single Family Residential and Medium Density Residential, and to
repeal the Heritage Preservation Overlay Zoning. Commissioner Workinger
seconded the motion. Ayes; McClelland, Workinger, L. Johnson, Shaw, Palmer,
Hale, Ingwalson, Runyan, G. Johnson. Nays, Faust. Motion carried.
Commissioner McClelland moved to hold the meeting over until January 31, 1990,
allowing the proponent time to address the concerns of grading, lot 11 easement,
and the relationship and density of the townhouses to the single family
residences. Commissioner L. Johnson seconded the motion.
Chairman G. Johnson asked if there were any further comments from the Commission
or public.
Mr. Steve Smithson, 5608 West 70th Street told the Commission he has no
objection to the development as a whole but expressed concern over the
transition from single family homes to townhomes. He added he believes the
buffer between them should be wider and more pronounced. He concluded saying
that maybe the townhouse portion is too dense as presented.
Upon roll call: Ayes; Faust, Hale, L. Johnson, H. McClelland, Runyan, Palmer,
Shaw, Workinger, Ingwalson, G. Johnson. Motion carried.
-90 -1 Final Development
7101 -13 Amundson
George Rosmides
Located: Southeast corner of C .*ill Road and
Request: Construct new office
Mr. Larsen presented his re and noted t property measures approximately
3.5 acres in area and is eloped with a s gle story warehouse building
containing 37,700 s e feet of floor area Mr. Larsen added the proponent
requests permi to construct a single s ry, 15,000 square foot
office -war se building on the westerly p tion of the site, south of
7
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JANUARY 3, 1989
Comprehensive Plan Quasi - Public to Single Family Residential and
Amendment Quasi Public to Medium Density Residential
Z -90 -1 R -1, Single Family to PRD -3, Planned Residential
District. Also repeal of Heritage Preservation
District from easterly 300 feet of site, at the
southwest corner of West 70th Street and Cahill
Road
5 -90 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval for Ridgewood Addition,
Ron Clark Construction, Cahill School Site
There are several actions required by this proposal. This report will deal
with each in the order listed above.
Comprehensive Plan Amendments:
The Comprehensive Plan designates most of the site as Quasi Public. This
designation includes churches, private schools, golf courses, and cemeteries.
The easterly 300 feet of the site is designated Medium Density Residential.
This designation includes townhouses and low -rise apartment buildings in a
density range of 6 -12 dwelling units per acre. except for Lewis Park the entire
west Cahill Road frontage from 70th to 78th Streets is designated Medium Density
Residential. The underlying zoning of the entire site (12.8 acres) is R -1,
single family. The City did, in 1982, approve a preliminary rezoning of the
easterly 2.1 acres of the site to allow a two story, 22 unit apartment building.
The proposed development suggests expanding the Medium Density designation to
the west, along 70th Street, approximately 480 feet. The remainder of the site
would change from Quasi - Public to Single Family Residential.
Recommendation'
The area proposed for Medium Density Residential makes sense and should be
approved. The area corresponds almost exactly to the adjacent townhouse and
condominium developments and other Medium Density Residential developments along
Cahill Road. The change from Quasi - Public to Single Family Residential should
also be approved. It provides the most appropriate relationship with the park
to the south and the single family lots to the west.
Heritage Preservation District:
Attached for Commission review are the minutes from the November 28, 1989,
meeting of the HPB, Heritage Preservation Board. This meeting held following a
joint meeting between the City Council, The Heritage Preservation Board, and
members of the Edina Historical Society on November 22, 1989. The purpose of
the joint meeting was to discuss the future of Old St. Patrick's Church. It is
the Board's recommendation that the building be removed from the site and the
history of the Cahill settlement be marked by a pocket park.
Recommendation:
Repeal Heritage Preservation District overlay zoning
Z -90 -1 Rezoning, R -1, Single Family to PRD -3, Planned Residence District
The proposed rezoning concerns the easterly arm of the site. It measures
approximately 780 feet along east -west axis and 240 feet along the north -south
axis. The site area is 4.3 acres. The proposal calls for 25 townhouse units
arranged in five buildings. The proposed density is 5.8 units per acre. A
comparison to other townhouse densities along Cahill follows:
* Village Drive Townhomes (immediately south on Village Drive) - 8.3
Units /Acre.
* Highlander I Townhomes (Cahill at Amundson) 7.8 Units /Acre
k Cahill of Edina (Cahill at 74th) - 9.7 Units /Acre
Three of the proposed buildings contain single story walkout units, and the
other three are two story units. The average size of the main floor of each
unit is 2,160 square feet, which includes an attached two -car garage. Exterior
materials are stucco and brick.
The townhouse development meets or exceeds the following Ordinance
requirements: lot area per dwelling unit; building coverage; building height;
usable lot area; and the number of units per building. The plan meets all
setback requirements except for the side street setback for unit eight. Unit
eight provides a 23 foot setback from Village Drive. Since Village Drive is a
public street, the required setback is 35 feet. Thus, a 12 foot side street
setback variance is requested. With this one exception the plan meets all
requirements of the. PRD -3 District.
The proposed development also requests preliminary plat approval for the 25
lots and one common outlot. The proposed plat complies with the requirements of
the City Subdivision Ordinance.
Assuming the required amendment of the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends
approval of Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Plat. We also recommend
granting the one variance requested, the 12 foot side street setback variance
for unit eight. Unit eight is separated from the street by a retaining wall and
is several feet higher than the street with no access to the street.
Recommended Conditions To Preliminary pproval:
1. Final Rezoning Approval
2. Final Plat Approval
3. Parkland Dedication
4. Developer's Agreement
5. Landscape Plan review and inspection fee
6. Investigation of a "pocket park" pursuant to recommendation of the
Heritage Preservation Board.
S -90 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval Ridgewood Addition, 13 Single Family Lots
Development Description:
The proposal is to redevelop 8.5 acres of the Cahill School site with 13
single dwelling unit lots. Twelve of the lots would front on a new public
street cul de sac off of West 70th Street. One lot, Lot 11, would front on West
70th Street.
Neighborhood:
The neighborhood for comparison purposes is illustrated on sheet five of
the submittal. It includes all developed single family lots within 500 feet of
the proposed subdivision. The median dimensions and sizes for the defined
neighborhood are:
Lot width: 110 Feet
Lot depth: 150 feet
Lot area: 16,800 square feet
Section 14, (b) of Ordinance 804, the Subdivision Ordinance, establishes
the above lot dimensions and lot area as minimums for all lots in the proposed
subdivision. Listed below are the corresponding dimensions and lot areas for
the 13 lots proposed. Lot areas or lot dimensions which fall below these
minimums are marked with an asterisk. Lots falling below any of the minimums
require a variance. *
Lot # Lot Width Lot Depth Lot Area
1 113' 132' 14,784*
2 113' 125' 15,525*
3 115' 176' 21,440
4 115' 392' 60,160
5 115' 327' 33,800
6 94'* 280' 36,400
7 34'* 315' 40,000
8 110' 162' 19,800
9 110 135'* 15,250*
10
145'
130'*
21,700
11
178'
124'*
22,250
12
150'
146'
21,609
13
130'
145'
19,980
Lot Width To Perimeter Ratio:
Section 14(b) (4) requires that each lot have a lot width to perimeter
ratio of 0.1 or greater. One lot in the proposed subdivision, No. 7, has a
ratio of less than 0.1, its ratio is 0.04. Thus, a variance to the required
ratio is requested.
Site Disturbance and Environmental Impact:
Sheet 1 of the submittal illustrates areas of steep slopes and heavily forested
areas of the site. The two areas are nearly coincident. The proposed building
pads for lots 4 through 9 follow the ridge line along the southerly and easterly
portions of the site. Significant disturbance to areas of steep slopes would
occur with the proposed development of Lots 5, 6, and 7, as illustrated on sheet
eight of the submittal.
Evaluation of Proposed Subdivision:
The proposed subdivision requests several variances to the requirements of
Section 14 (b) of Ordinance No. 804. Specifically, lot width variances for lots
6 and 7. Lot depth variances for lots 9, 10, and 11, and lot area variances for
lots 1, 2 and 9. In addition lot 7 would require a variance from the lot width
to perimeter ratio requirement. In staff's opinion the most significant
variances are the two variances required by lot 7. If lot 7 is eliminated from
the plat I believe all significant variances will be eliminated. An additional
benefit will be a reduction in the amount of disturbance to the areas of steep
slopes and dense vegetation.
Summary of Recommended Actions:
Amend Comprehensive Plan from Quasi Public to Single Family Residential
and Medium Density Residential.
* Repeal Heritage Preservation Overlay Zoning.
* Preliminary Rezoning Approval for 25 unit townhouse development.
* Preliminary Plat approval for Ridgewood Addition subject to elimination
of Lot 7.
0
�SINGLE FAMILY
Li
EDUCATIONAL FACILITY
(--,QUASI PUBLIC
9'a
SINGLE FA
Nx�
X
7
z
PUBLIC zzz
SITE Z0NW8--R-f--__
TOTAL /I 2.8 ACRES___�
—)/TREE LINE
18% SLOPE OR GREATER
SINGLE FAMILY ETC. -LAND USE DESIGNATION
f ftJO
11N,
� I�Illjjl
CAHILL.
W. Oth STREET
...... . ....
coultT
_j
IEDIUF61
.-DENSITY.
s li tj 4 VILLAGE DR.
1) Cl RCIAL
0
H I =(Ua H F0 I Wff
7 ED� DENSITY
1 HV4HLAk-4PEFL
Crr4TCR_
F-Jil
wNS11irstill.11ON -K al". I
:
l 14 !DANA 111DUST•MIA &LOW
•D
ANA, Un 684S• a-M 0-98-.9ft
t_.. - —T.
PUT
Fl I
LLJ.
J1.�
i��J
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
7U�
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Df%U CL AR -
Crr4TCR_
F-Jil
wNS11irstill.11ON -K al". I
:
l 14 !DANA 111DUST•MIA &LOW
•D
ANA, Un 684S• a-M 0-98-.9ft
t_.. - —T.
PUT
Qj I all 1 Existing Zoning
VIIa 1 _
tl i _
I I1 NO R ANGE� ..... I
�. ,
(EXISTING LAND USE
/ X
REGUIDE TO�� -�
\� _LOW DENSITY =
_
q>.o���
I
Y
—W. Otn STREET
tag ng � \ l
1+E ONETO RD-3
II I I STING LAND USE I`'' �
I I I II I ;QUASI PUBLIC i e141 10 I Al 6�(ISTING LAND U'
I I I II I fI REGUIDE Td. —_ / 1 y'�. MEDIUM DENS
�- — — VILLAGE DR.
FITI
1.
-LAND USE
AMMENDMENT
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
1114 [01NA INDUSTRIAL OU/...
i . ..
Imm"YN glass-
0 .
'
0
cr-
J
J
¢
U
+1'T
1v
�i
1111
vhf"
o�1e:►u•uw �
t.. .Ttl W
-
0 l/ 10 1 0 go R
rx
--t--
MT 4- -1
-1- .. -w. Oth STREW
I f I,z. 11.
0
1 Q
J f ` z.
-✓ I RIDG W OD
3. 9. ��� / VI OE OR. II
Ilk,\` LA DER
Clio rN-
-
����- ICI `k
��= ��� ►Ili J
FT FIT
I� / / � � � \ ✓j / / / /// Q o�caT csuwasrue �'' ',
O i
Ata•.sol. r
It .iAea II a A< dp► ID.I AMO.w•Iq CAldtLW M.q l
I I /
ruY Ivry Loft uwe
aw*.n wory I .,
NMMIM PLA. lI i-M+Q! 4 r �M.
O SI _
LO T / •
1wA+.+�Y V�1 1•l In+�T .
I a wlararr.c l,t. u-, P '
/ Il'Im ! AWWI.W inr. .
I I • 1m Y7 u. �!#A qW ,PA[L iEF WIi
uITM SITE CONCEPT PLAN
I RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION — �+
A114 EDIAA IAp YATAIAL ALYY. wn. r1 ►INA I•
10111A.' 'YM $6438
I
r' w
® IIOAiY
• a� Ao � q . o o.r�I `i
I
—W Oth STREET
HIGHLANDEFC�11—
1-T, L,
I el 1 I I u..0,♦
26
12 ) I /I
26 0
0 711
A
lo X
<
L)
R.
J
9
Se
X\l tp
40
kz
777
D•veloprmral summary
TOTAL ACRES 12,6 AC
-,UUU
SOLE MR.V AC61EB SA AC TOWNPIGM■ ACM 4.4 AC
SINGLE FAULT LOT AREA 7.1 AC TOWNHOME LOTS 38
RIO.W. 01 AC TOWNHOME IBM 25
MOLE FAMILY LOTS 13 LOTS SITE AREA PER UNIT 7492 SOFT.
MINN. LOT "U'S 14.784 SOFT. LOT AREA PER UWT 24W
IL IT aU:E "AM so". SUR.D.QAIKA XIG9L# 5Q.FT
zotma , I SETSA" STANDARDS BUILDING COVERAGE 26A%
USEABLE INTS AREA PER UNIT . 00
Nv net ,Y
SITE REZONED TO VIM9 SffTlAQL
ry
YEAR AV'L LOT 23.371 SOFT.
WOMM
AV! LOT 11.700 ED".
OWN, DENSITY IA UWAC 0110" DILAIM" ILA UWAG
Ff, Fl
Lii1J
PHELIMINARY PLAT
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
14
01 EDINA INDUSTRIAL •LVD.
EDINA. SIX 46428 1
• as so I GO .180 FEET
I
to UNITO /ACRt
LL-t_L_1 -J
1.0 UNITS /ACRE �!'I"- -�r—ur o - ♦ �--� rC
:
,�/) uad
x/11 n
d��i...�u�i.d��
7UTA tTMEET wLaTr
•mil / /ri7T //%%%7 ('777717 .177777IY277
/
ulrAYL•ml, j�l jj 1
2.1 UNITS /ACRE
PROJECT SITE
350' BOUNDARY LINE
8.3 UNITS /ACRE
14 UNITS /ACRE
7.8 UNITS /ACRE
I
l
r1
�I
I
II
IYU.
1 u� E--- MiPNI Arew.e IoT �.lA
1 .Im
� Y4iY
�m
� Yam
1 r,+oY
1 lean
rtem
1 flOm
1 170m
[ Y[Q
1,®
I,®
, e,m
� e,m
` em
elw
uo
� 01op
ern
, M1m
lelm
lo`a
1 GaD
t AI,e
e,m
1®0
lo.m
AmGD : M. I,nl »w.n MENN M(W14E bOf �Ilf
wrtm" J70op ertf.
SIZE COMPARISONS ' =T
ADD. REQUIREMENTS R -1
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION J
1111 {Y111A INDUSTRIAL BLVD. wmHHw
aDIrA, 'rr 69428
Kom rO11TN Ap Y
1 ` 0 m ko �aY
b
2?-
2
N
4.
-0
6.
X
Aop
a 01,
".a
03
$10
;INS own
WT "--4 Get"
Y
2
malmsomwl"T
a -1
@62A
STREE-r
VILLA
►r
-J,
FITP
WAL,
a.ww op I.
—Go — - lbuWmA C114TcuL-
)SI LO OTW.::
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN
R ON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
91114 91DIN• INDUSTRIAL BLVD. •AMV-1F19•9
EDINA, an 55426
6:
0 If Ila IGO %so F"7
F,
12.
2
D13.
//1 110
7.
Vj
7�777/7777 7-,-
too __.v
FULIMINARY UTILITIES PLAN
WM'CI!ARK CONSTRUCTION
1%11*'KO1MA;:DU:1A1kL BLVD.
muhl mu, 42 ammo► 7
�c
T11:11i
k1_
6
A
kGE-DR7 77 7,
O II
:�I� Mj
r-r ir
TT. I FITS
L J i t-jl 1, t
A W�%
)SI LO T
M, MOM
0 as so 100 ISO VILIT
J,
.—W. 0th STREET
4
R
it
4
9
Ej
GE DR.
0. �u
Existing O,, ir
Tree Line
A
0
-FTT
'lap I TS FIT'
ppiop -, rl
00JDlSTQ.p E
FAI POP ldrb H.] LLj-Ll
I---- Ell
".7
)S I Lo T
NO DISTURBANCE PLAN &
LOTS WITH 18% SLOPES'
RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION
:11,14 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD.
ewuf
INA. NO 56436
en 1
0 29 so 700 too VILST
11
■aaaaaa■ ■aaaaaaa� " ■aaaaaa■ ■aaaa aaaaago ■aaaaaa■
■aaaaaa■ ■aaa■ 1�,. ■aaaaaa■
�aaaaaaaa��aaaaaua�I ��!i� ___ � --
•uaaaa■ ■aaaaaa■ + ,aaaaaaaa. 5 ■aaaaaa■ .nr i -) ;...�aaaa■
LOUDER LEvEL FLOOR PLAN
i;
so =z
U]oaC dc-
ZM
C)zs�°�a
o Y
all.
SIIEF.r p
F--- - - - - -- I o t
BEMMOOM 63^ I -I
I I HALE / F - - I
I -
I
ee09 � I
t-- I °mw - -7 BEDROOM n m.... I
ILI
I
I I
Id�M„�1 I
I I
I
--------------------
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN r
OB�TH
OH .
MASTER gT�Y
BATH
MASTER BEDROOM COURTYARD
r
WALK -IN • -
i�
ON 4 j
I
1
w I 1
1
I •P'4 BREAKFAST I
I
` O LAUN GARAfi8
1
LIVIN6/DMING ROOM �i I
DBGK
1
KItCHE1J REAR
FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
n I
4
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPEMENT
at West 70th and Cahill Road
in
Edina, Minnesota
Prepared for
Ron Clark Construction Company
Edina, Minnesota
August, 1989
KI
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to provide a detailed analysis of the traffic impact
of the proposed land use change for the the parcel of land in the southwest quadrant
of W. 70th Street and Cahill Road in Edina.
The existing land use is a Montessori School operating at 5555 -5601 W. 70th Street,
formely an Edina elementary school. The Montessori School also utilizes the
building at 7000 Cahill Road.
METHODOLOGY
Traffic volume forcasts were prepared to determine the number of trips the proposed
residential development will generate. The am and pm peak hourly volumes and
directional distribution were determined.
Data was collected to determine the traffic generated by the existing utilization of
this parcel by the Montessori School.
The anticipated traffic volumes for the proposed residential developement were
compared to the traffic volumes generated by the existing land use. These
comparisons are made to determine if the proposed land use change would have an
adverse impact on the adjacent street network or reduce the level of service at
intersections in the immediate area.
If any adverse impacts are found, mitigative measures and specific design treatments
would be proposed to address these impacts.
PROPOSED LAND USE
The proposed development for this parcel consists of a residential development of 26
townhome units and 13 single family detached homes. All access to this residential
development would be off of W. 70th Street. The Conceptual layout shows a single
entrance serving the single family homes and terminating in a cul -de -sac. The 26
townhomes would have 3 entrances off of W 70th Street serving the four "clusters" of
townhomes.
EXISTING LAND USE
Montessori Day Care Centers, Inc. operates a full time Montessori Day Care Center
and K -7 Montessori school in the former Edina elementary school facility at 5555-
5601 W. 70th Street. This facility has access to W. 70th Street via two driveways
with connecting roadway along the front, or north side of the buildings, and a
parking lot entrance off of W. 70th Street easterly of the buildings.
The Montessori Day Care and School operates 12 months a year. The day care
enrollment of 200 students drops to 150 during the summer months, and the K -7 school
enrollment of 137 students drops to 70 students during the summer months. There is
a full time staff compliment of 35.
The Edina School District leases office space in the Montessori School building and
maintains a staff of 30 employees.
The Montessori School also operates out of a separate building located at 7000
Cahill Road on the easterly portion of this parcel. This facility houses the
performing arts functions and has access off of Cahill Road only. There are two
full time staff persons and five patrons at this address.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Each land use generates trips at a unique rate. Trip generation rates have been
collected and compiled by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The
regression equations for ITE Land Use Codes 230 (Residential Condominium) and 210
(Single Family Detached Housing) from ITE's Trip Generation, 4th Edition, were used
to forecast traffic volumes generated by the proposed residential development.
The traffic volumes generated by the Montessori Day Care and School were calculated
from traffic survey data and supplemental information regarding school operations,
enrollment and hours, student population distribution and means of commute furnished
by Mr. Marsh Everson, Montessori Pressident.
A. RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT (as proposed)
TYPE:
Townhomes
Single Family
Totals
ITE CODE:
230
10
-
ITE LAND USE:
Residential
Single Family
-
Condominium
Detached Housing
DWELLING UNITS:
26
13
-
ADT:
208
145
353
AM IN:
3
3
6
OUT:
15
9
24
AM TOTAL
18
12
30
PM IN:
14
10
24
OUT:
6
5
11
PM TOTAL
20
15
35
i'
B. MONTESSORI DAY CARE AND SCHOOL (existing)
o Full time pre- school: 200 students (150
summer)
o Grades K -7: 137 students (70 summer)
o Full time staff: 35
o Activity vehicles (Montessori): 3 buses
+ van
o Outside activity vehicles:
1 - Edina School System activity bus
1 - Talmud Torah activity bus
o Remote facility for performing arts at
7000 Cahill Road:
2 Full time staff persons
5 patrons
o Office space rented to Edina School District:
30 employees
TRIPS
(Trip Ends) Montessori Student
Montessori
Edina
by: Employees drop off/
deliveries,
School Dist.
Total
pick up
meeting,
offices
(1)
visitors,
activities
ADT 70 1000
32
74
1176
AM in: 35 250
0
30
315
out: 0 250
0
0
250
AM Total 35 500
0
30
565
PM in: 0 250
0
0
250
out: 35 250
0
30
315
PM Total 35 500
0
30
565
(1) There is no bus service to drop students off or pick students up. The students
are dropped off and picked up by parents. Car pooling is minimal and students
arrive and depart during the peak hour commute hours. A student being dropped
off constitutes two trips as does a student being picked up.
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
Student population distribution shows that 70% of the students trips are routed
through the intersection of T.H. 100 and W. 70th Street.
ANALYSIS
A review of the tabulated trips forcasted for the proposed residential development
compared to the traffic generated by the existing operation of the Montessori
facility shows a substantial reduction in traffic.
SUMMARY
The proposed land use change to a residential development would have no negative
traffic impact.
10-
5-
AC
AOT
1176
HIGHCROFT
Traffic Impact Analysis
Trip Generation
AM PM
TOTAL TOTAL
AM AM PM PM
IN OUT IN OUT
J J
565 °o 0 565 0 00
i
5
N V UX 0
315 `n W 315
= LL i LL 250 250
vi = LL i
30 3 3 15 9 35 1t
6 10 5
HOUSING — 13 Single Family
— 25 Townhomes
MONTESSORI SCHOOL
— 35 Staff
— 220 to 237 Students
RON CLARK
CONSTRUCTION, INC.
October 10, 1989
Mr. Craig Larsen
Planning Director
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
;l la EDINA INDUSTRIAL BL \'D ED[NA. SIN "43; bl' S-11-22-15
Re: Wooddale Montessori School Site
Dear Mr. Larsen:
I am very concerned about the future use or disposition of the Performing Arts
Center as it relates to the redevelopment of this site. We have studied several
options for the building as you requested and our findings are as follows.
We have studied the possibility of using the structure as an office building at
its current location. The building was, of course, originally built as a church
and it would require a lot of remodeling expenses to convert it to desirable
office space. The building was constructed too high on the site which requires
exterior steps making access awkward, it has very limited parking, and it lacks
windows which are very important for office space. While it does have a
mezzanine, it is basically a one -story building with high ceilings that would not
be economical or functional for offices. The office building vacancy rate is very
high and it is common in today's market for a tenant to negotiate six months free
rent with a three year lease. It is our opinion this would not make a good office
building and it would not favorably compete with other office space in the
southwest area. We feel it would be very speculative and probably not financable
by conventional underwriting standards.
We have also studied the possibility of moving the building to Arneson Acres Park
which is east of"-Highway 100 on West 70th Street. The building is 36 feet wide by
60 feet long and it is tall which creates clearance problems. The house mover we
consulted with informs us that one critical problem in attempting to move the
building is that it primarily has only the four exterior walls. It does not have
interior walls like a house to keep it rigid during transit. Consequently, the
building would likely incur considerable damage from racking. The mover is
especially concerned with this at the steep entrance to Arneson Acres which would
apply a lot of racking pressure to the building. There would be additional costs
to straighten the building at the new location and it may require a new roof.
Continued
Mr. Craig Larsen
October 10, 1989
Page 2
There are several obstacles along the moving route. There are overhead high
tension lines by the railroad track on West 70th Street. Because of the height of
the building we would be required to contract with N.S.P. and the other
appropriate utility companies to shut down services. The building would not go
under the bridge at Highway 100 and 70th Street so the best route appears to be to
take the west frontage road of Highway 100 north to 66th Street, cross the bridge
over Highway 100, then south on the east frontage road to 70th Street. There are
additional obstacles on this route. The stop light arms would have to be removed
at two locations, on 70th Street both on the east side and west side of Highway
100. Also on the east side of Highway 100 on the frontage road there is a full
width overhead sign that would have to be removed and replaced with a crane.
The mover needs a minimum of four feet of clearance under the building for moving
and handling equipment. Inotherwords, at the new location it cannot be placed on
a slab. It would require either a full basement or a crawl space basement no less
than four feet high to set the building down and remove equipment. This obviously
means more foundation expenses. After straightening the building at its new
location, it would then have to be rebuilt including interior repairs and
finishing. The interior hardwood floors would not survive the move and would
require replacement and repair. The electrical wiring in the building is obsolete
and it should be completely rewired. The chimney would also need to be replaced.
We had previously estimated a cost to move the building of approximately
$70,000.00 which did not include an allowance for removing and replacing obstacles
along the route or the high tension wire contract. Our revised estimate for
moving the building and all associated items is $92,000.00.
The building does not seem to have an economically viable use. It is my opinion
this is an excessive amount to spend without having first identified a good
long -term use for the building. I believe the best decision would be to dismantle
the building, and if the city needs a facility in the future, to construct a new
building better suited for the intended use.
Sincerely,
aC�''
Ronald E. Cla
REC /cw
c Mike Gair
RON CLARK IIII
CONSTRUCTION, INC. 5114 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLS D EDINA. at\ 554 �5 01-
October 10, 1989
ESTIMATE
Move Performing Arts Center to Arneson Park
Remove and replace route obstacles, high tension line contract $19,000
Move building 17,000
New foundation 13,000
Replace chimney 4,000
Rewire building 7,000
Straighten building, repair floors and walls 10,000
Reroof 6,000
Heating and mechanical repair and connections 3,000
Water and sewer installation and connections 5,000
Exterior asphalt and steps. 4,000
Miscellaneous 4,000
Source: Doepke House Movers
$92,000
Agenda Item III.B.C.D.E.
March 17, 1990 (St. Patrick's Day)
Lynne Westphal
5704 Kemrich Drive
Edina, MN 55439
Edina City Council
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mayor Richards and City Council Members,
Is it true that the southwest quadrant of Edina has now absorbed
between 41 to 61 percent of the total population of Edina? (I've
heard both of these figures recently.).
During these years of ever increasing density, my neighbors and
I have adjusted, not always happily, but we have adjusted. This
is probably because of the softening affect of Lewis. Park and
because we had faith that someday our forward thinking city
leaders would rescue and preserve the corner of 70th Street and
Cahill Road for obvious historical reasons. We believed this be-
cause without the corner's historical church building, this area
would be devoid of tangible, visual proof of Edina's colorful
Irish history. The corner cries to be recognized.
From my deepest heart, I urge you to save this significant piece
of Edina's history in some meaningful way.
I will close with the following information shared by professor
John Borchert who spoke at the Edina Future Commission's first
forum held on February 1, 1990.
Edina will have some difficulities maintaining
community coherence as it adjusts to the congestion
the rest of the world already feels. Therefore,
Edinans must retain a sense of continuity and quality
in the community. And in order to do that, you need
to develop a sense of history for your newcomers.
Please think about this futurist's words as you consider the
development of 70th Street and Cahill Road. Thank you.
Respectfully submitted,
Lynne.Westphal
A-enda Item III.B.C.D.E.
1 27,.L c1W l I ,I `l e
IfD
7777
�.,.L.���,..�, ¢..L- �, a- ry�r� cue„ � V14a � Y�i�_ G7..� cSG .� �yNw�' [L• +^�:
-y\ CL,
u�� w C 11 c z ru4 �• ,� �a °Lc rtyt ��, , z �.a
Y"
A!Vf7
��;,� '�.!_niwr.�.. -. �•', c�a cvl:L c�.v�.�� t=.i`y- C'p't.�'�
�
1- 0.Q .�,i� -:�aL 14.yt,: �. Q.I Iti- !�.'11.��� f �i--- d✓ViiS� �Ll�� � V
��C1X•4�.� 0.., GI
T
QA.1A.
w w, tl%ZL emu- �ti oA, . ea ► «. _ ... rc.i�
t e.yv .0 �= c d �a c.cU a—,.,—
a,- E
�-ar l3ta ci1u+L -<r�c_ ,u;—
r
�jiLLV�n�.w. c�. �i.•w ��- r.�-- � -i.,Z, �.a7tr�•vL:
S�aTt,:- 1•r•s- on...� iVi:►•� = +- c...�c:.:.._ ��Yil �Flw.. /`i-�t� ,
n•�- p1
-..1
'�L:�Yt � tYYV �..�rV_.L rZl�1u•�U -`-' /�G/v�LW \Ca�t� .
i
C `C7t
Agenda Item III.B.C.D.E.
5721 W. 70th St.
Edina, Mn. 55435
March 18, 1990
Dear Mayor and City Council Members.
Eighteen years ago we considered building a home on
a lot at 5721 W. 70th St. After carefully weighing pros
and cons, sitting in our car and monitoring traffic flow,
gathering opinions and information about-Edina, we chose
to go forward and build. The traffic flow was not ideal,
but tolerable. There was even a serene farmhouse and
several cows (1) in the fields off Cahill.
Needless to say, over the years we have seen vast
changes in density and traffic. With more and more students
driving, the high school adding more parking spaces, more
homes and development, the traffic over the years has greatly
increased. Attempting to leave your windows open on a nice
day results in a film of road dust throughout one's house.
While the striping of 70th has been beneficial, we still
have the same number of vehicles but at a more controlled
speed. This was accohandgallhofduslowetthemoour
of several concerned homeowners
gratitude . .
While the proposed development at 70th and Cahill may
be touted as "progress," I personally. feel the density of
the project can only be justified on two counts, increased
tax revenue for Edina and a substantial profit for the
developer. There must be a breaking point whre we say,
"Stop, this is enough." A line from an old (Beach Boys ?)
song keeps coming to mind ....... 'They paved paradise and
put up a parking lot."
The proposal of•a historical pocket park would be ideal
and help maintain the existing neighborhood atmosphere.
I certainly hope the City Council will consider alternatives
to the density of the proposed development -- -let's remove
the $$ signs and try to maintain that elusive "quality of
life" Minnesota and Edina are reputed to have. Eden Prairie
looms enticingly over the 494 horizon!
Thank You,
• u1
Doris Stevens
0. Proposal before Council comes unapproved and not recommended.
Relevant and Concurrent issues to be addressed by others:
1. Contractor commitments to Highpointe buyers:
a. Second building, greenspace and amenities
b. No structures would be built to the North even if Church
disappeared
2. Status and disposition of the Irish Settlement site and
church foundation -- prospects of a pocket park similar to Edina
Mills as recommended to City Council by the Heritage
Preservation Committee.
a. Ordinance 804 Para 11.v directs dedication of such land.
b. Park is complementary to resolution sought by Highpointe
residents as in 1 above.
3. Environmental Protection - -as of 3- 19 -90, the underground
fuel tank at the school remains unlicensed in violation of both
MNPCA and EPA - -state and Federal law since 1 January 1990. Must
be addressed immediately, not just when the school is razed.
4. Erosion and Flood concerns expressed by Plan Commission
r
r
W
i
0
Cd
rt w
� w
b
�n
� m
w�
rt m
En rt
0 a
V rt
Vt O
o n
00 O
G
w
V I-
C
rt d
rt
n
NAME
ADDRESS
JAN 31
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Stephen A. Smithson
5608
W. 70th Street
yes
Dr.
and
Mrs.
Richard J..Stafford
7220
Tara Road
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Ted Steen
5524
W.'70th Street
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Clarence Steinback
5508
McGuire Rd.
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Everett J. Stelzner
7012
Lanham Lane
Mr.
James,A.
Steven
7000
Lee Valley Circle
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Lee Stevens
5721-
W. 70th Street
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Stevens
7101
Lanham Lane
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Wayne Sundberg
5613
McGuire Rd.
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
R. E. Swanson
5512
McGuire Rd.
yes
Ms.
Linda K.
Ward
5704
McGuire Rd.
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Keith Warfield
5422
Creekview Lane
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Russell M. Willeke
7108
Lanham Lane
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Kermit H. Wilson
7001
Antrim Rd.
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Stephen Winnick
7117
Lanham Lane
MARCH 20
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
TOTALS: 152.00
NAME
ADDRESS
JAN 31 MARCH
20
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Herschel-E. Kitchen
7004
Lanham Lane
yes
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Gene Kragness
5712.W..70th
Street
yes
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Lloyd Kugler
5717-McGuire
Rd.
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Henry J. Langer
7101
Antrim Court
2
Mr.
Larry law
4 Antrim Terrace
1
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Charles T. Lawrence
5701
McGuire Rd.
yes
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Ralph Linvill
.7005
Antrim Road
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
P.S. Maas
7123
Antrim Ct.
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Robert T. Maley
5612
McGuire Rd.
yes
2
Mr.
and
Mrs..Neil
McLouth
7015
Lee Valley Circle
yes
2
Ms.
Patricia
L. Olander
7001
Lee Valley Circle
yes
3
Mr.
and
Mrs:
Robert R. 011mann
7008
Lanham Lane
yes
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Jonathan Pederson
7029.
Lanham Lane
yes,sent own ltr
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Daniel N. Phillips
5716
McGuire Rd.
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
R.L. Pierce
7113
Lanham Lane
1
Mr.
and
Mrs.
David L. Potter
5805
McGuire Rd.
2
Mr.
Lee
A. Prolous
5506
W. 70th St.
1
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Fred Regli
5616
McGuire Rd.
yes
2
Mr.
James Ridley
5426
Creek View Lane
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
E.T. Rine
7016
Lanham Lane
yes
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Gerald P. Rishavy
5817
McGuire Rd.
2
Dr.
M. Sanderson
5528
W. 70th Street
yes
1
Mr.
and
Mrs.
A. Schneider
7033
Lanham Lane
yes
Mrs.
Rita Seasly
5604
W. 70th Street
yes
3
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Scott Smith
7012
Lee Valley Circle
yes
2
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Del Smith
5613
Brook Drive
2
NAME
e
ADDRESS JAN 31 MARCH 20
Mr,
and
Mrs.
John W. Duffy
7041
Lanham
Lane
yes
The
Larson /McNeice Family
7013
Lee Valley
Circle
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Ed Fitzpatrick
6913
Limerick
Lane
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Lee E. Frank
7040
Lanham
Lane
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Ferdinand Frieden
7017
Lee Valley
Circle
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
M.M. °Garrison
7025
Lanham
Lane
Mr.
Charles
0..Geadelmann
6912
Hillside
Lane
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Richard I. Giertsen
7045
Lanham
Lane
yes
Ms.
Cathie De
Grood
5500
W. 70th
st.
Mr.
and
Mrs.
P.B. Grossman
7300
Lanham
Lane
Ms.
Barbara
Halvorson
5721
McGuire
Rd.
Mr.
and
Mrs.
John K. Helland
5720
McGuire
Rd.
Dr.
and
Mrs.
Miles Hirschey
5501
Village
Drive
yes
Mr,
and
Mrs.
Ray Holzworth
6905
Antrim Road
Mrs.
Elizabeth
J. Howe
5605
McGuire
Rd.
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Todd Huebscher
5709
McGuire
Rd.
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Edward G. Hustad
5801
McGuire
Rd.
Mr.
Kurt
Ibach
5502
W. 70th
St.
Mrs.
B.
Igelsrud
7015
Lee Valley
Circle
yes
Dr.
and
Mrs.
James E. Indrehus
7015
Lanham
Lane
Ms.
Linda Johnson
5720.:W.
70th
Street
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Dale Johnson
7021
Lee Valley
Circle
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
R. Laurence Johnson
7105
Lanham
Lane
yes
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Alan Johnston
5616
W. 70th
Street
yes
Dr.
and
Mrs.
Martin B. Kaplan
7116
Lanham
Lane
Mr,
and
Mrs.
Dale Kiedrowski
5704
W. 70th
Street
yes
NAME
Mr. Terry Adams
Mr. and Mrs. Douglas Agner
Mr. and Mrs. Rand D. Aksamit
Dr. and Mrs. M.M. Aksoy
Mr. and Mrs. Paul Altman
Mr. Stephen A. Anderson
Mr. David Aronoble
Mr. and Mrs. Torence L. Becker
Dr. and Mrs. Allen Van Beek
Mr. and Mrs. Dennis Beltrand
Mr. and Mrs. David P. Berenson
Mr. and Mrs. David F. Bittner
Mr. and Mrs. Bofenkamp
Mr. and Mrs. John Bohan
Mr. and Mrs. Bruce B. Bredehoft
Mr. and Mrs. Helmut Breuer
Dr. and Mrs. Warren E. Brown
Mr. and Mrs. Stavros Canakes
Mr. Bruce E. Carlson
Mr. and Mrs. Peter Choukalas
Mr. and Mrs. L.D. Compton
Mr. and Mrs. John Couillard
Mr. and Mrs. Robert Curle
Mr. and Mrs. Russell J. Daniels
Mr. and Mrs. Duane E. Delegard
Mr. and Mrs. William H. Doepke
ADDRESS
JAN 31
MARCH 20
5812
W. 70th Street
yes
2
7017
Lanham Lane
2
7005
Lanham Lane
yes
2
5600
W. 70th Street
yes
.2
7021
Lanham Lane
1
5506
W. 70th St.
1
5508
W. 70th St.
1
5596
W. 70th Street
yes
2
7115
Antrim Ct.
2
5816
W. 70th Street
yes, mailed
2
5617
McGuire Road
yes
5820
W. 70th Street
yes
2
7024
Lanham Lane
2
7000
Lanham Lane
2
7100
Lanham Lane
yes
2
7304
Tara Road
2
7028
Lanham Lane
2
7011
Lee Valley Circle
yes
5716
W. 70th Street
yes
1
5708
W. 70th Street
yes
2
7009
Lanham Lane
2
5700
W. 70th Street
yes
2
5601
McGuire Rd.
yes
2
5705
McGuire Rd.
yes
2
7209
Lanham Lane
2
5920
W. 70th Street
yes
1
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Reject proprosal as presented.
2. Resolve Historical Preservation Issue -- Moving Target
Clark /HIghpointe Residents
3. Re- confirm R -1 for Entire tract until Proposal is received
for
a. Park and /or 2 -3 unit /acre maximum density twin homes
from Cahill to Limerick -- approximately 250 to 300 feet
along 70th St.
b. Detached, single family (1.8 to 2.1 /acre) West of Limerick
c. Incorporate resolution of 2 above
4. Direct immediate licensing of underground fuel tank.
5. Integrate with a fix of the Cahill access to 70th Street.
9. Surrounding Neighborhoods overwhelmingly object to the
townhomes and accompanying density as the proposal for this
property.
a. Surrounding residents desire re- establishment of
detached, single family neighborhood given school
disappears.
b. Not against development per se, but not in favor of
"look- alike" structures targeted for a single demographic
class -- retiree and empty nesters.
c. Every square foot remaining in this Edina neighborhood
doesn't require a structure or. pavement- -when cutting
from 25 townhomes to 21 (18%), land use dropped 3 %.
d. Using methods of Real Estate Appraisers, single family
homes sell for 3 -8% less if they were not adjacent and
require longer times on market.. Thus far, Edina has
avoided.
e. Precedent - -20 February 1990 City Council Action rejected
6 units /acre on 1 acre Delaney Blvd. site suggesting
4 /acre was the acceptable maximum.
• next to high density to the East
• pond and open space to Single family to the West
• TOTALLY UNCONTESTED !
s
r
7. Low Density (0 -6 DU /Acre) is stated as the housing type for
buffers
a. medium density must be extensively buffered: natural
features, linear open space corridors, lower density
transitional uses.
b. the low density carries a maximum of 4 dwelling units
per structure! :
C. "low density to be influenced by surrounding single family
densities."
d. adequacy of berms, retaining walls, landscaping, size of
transplantable trees ... do not constitute "extensive
buffering"
8. Photo board shows direct impact on 70th St. residents North
of the proposed multiple dwelling units.
5. Comprehensive Plan: Maintain and protect single family
detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use in
Edina.
a. Underlying zoning for entire parcel is R -1
b. There are a number of available townhomes down Cahill- -
Those sold since mid -1989 have been on the market for
considerable periods, 6 to 9 months, and many have taken
significant price cuts to sell.
c. Some of the problems brought by the rampant development of
the Hwy 100 / 70th Street quadrant are documented in the
Tax Increment Development Plan.
d. The Quality of Living has suffered with the access,
traffic, noise,and speed.
6. Comprehensive Plan states there will.be transitional use or
buffer between single family homes and higher densities:
a. to existing single family neighborhoods
b. to proposed single family homes.
c. higher density developments to the South.
2+0 UNITS/ACRE ;
1.x.8
sti�v
lie, --
- : -... .. rs_� r..• :w7• �i- x:'aa+^+r_ � . •o�. :-• �-!m �- .sr� �.<Y.arana�.•i►.•.�I^^ : swHh�� � � " � 1 . . .•._. - '.. ... � .. _ - tea.:
00 O, w ® s5 d
_j teo -1� � •
V
�1 • 1v� ?oab �
JNITS /ACRD
1004
It
' f
I t1civ I
;?, I M;
�vlZ
I UN'I S /ACRI,
JNDA.RY..UNE
_ . v/
t•,! 1 NX.,)
� i I ► �7o '�ww��,, : �3__w _ . _ l— �i , 4 x� � I1 � 1 4 mom
eb
I'l wo a. ►\ 1
�iE1- - I i 7
2 27 32 19 go � 4
r
/
4b 13?� �. z
CD
p 100r) Za7 1044 12.14 �
tg).
z ,
1 rf'
3 _ -0 , 'H 10 0 } I
11 — t'
6 O •-• { I Ip� + 11 (O
1C a �rJIN
(Af� 11 1r
:/V LOV QT r
30 00 p j .460*5 amoss-D a GDURT \
00
, SINGLE FAMILY /
' Aso 0 34 p - (?-i n! !? c c�
MEN_ f:A_.>Lo4ZZs's_Q_t? L.Li..v
II. • �j
1 , T . /� , ,9 _ IAltlf AYE LET 2 a,7o0 so_C . 1J _ NI4'a41 tU1NT t 5+-tioP�'I N(�
_ / I Q
16 ►oo °6rRO� ..DENSR'Y, IA -UWAC
E. . ..... N ENE o
Ad 65 - r-n n Z
IALAMM
TTA
E LL
T 8 N`"• FITAPEIS 5EaDtAV Ate• --
lob_
-Y /
2
A.
A
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To:
Kenneth Rosland
Agenda Item #
TTT-
F.
From:
Craig Larsen,
Consent
❑
City Planner
-
Information Only
❑
Date:
March 19, 1990
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject:
Year XVI Community
Eil
To Council
Development Block
Grant (CDBG) Program
Action
❑
Motion
0
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Adopt resolution approving budget for submission to Hennepin County.
Info /Background:
For the Year XIV (1990) Hennepin County has been allotted $2,578.000 in CDBG
funds from the federal government which is 2.6 percent less than received in
1989. The City of Edina's allocation of $134,116 reflects a similar decrease
from our 1989, Year XV allotment of $139,118.
The CDBG Budget includes:
Proposed
1990 1989
Year XVI Year XV
H.O.M.E. Program
(Household and Outside Maintenance
for the Elderly) $24,450 $23,300
Child Day Care Subsidy $20,000 $20,000
Rehabilitation of Private Property
Removal of Architectural Barriers
TOTAL
$39,425 $40,000
$50,241 $55,818
$134,116 $139,118
The four projects in the proposed budget have all been continued from previous
years of the program. A brief description of each project follows:
H.0.M.E.
The H.O.M.E. Program provides maintenance, repair and chore services for elderly
Edina residents. The H.O.M.E. request of $24,450 reflects an increase from the
$23,300 funding level in Year XV. The increase is explained in the attached
letter from the-,H.O.M.E. coordinator.
Child Day Care
The day care subsidy is administered by the Greater Minneapolis Day Care
Association. The $20,000 requested is consistent with the previous two years in
which we have provided day care assistance. A letter requesting continued
assistance is attached.
Rehabilitation of Private Property
The Rehab project provides grants for major repairs to income eligible Edina
homeowners. Although all areas of Edina are included, we will continue to
concentrate our promotional efforts in northwest Edina, the area east of France
Avenue and north of West 60th Street, and the Morningside area.
A single person household with an income less than $15,750 would qualify (2
person household - $18,000, etc). The program is operated on a first come,
first served basis; and dependent upon the extent of home improvements, up to
$10,000 is available per applicant.
Removal of Architectural-Barriers
This project will continue to make handicapped access improvements to public
buildings. Projects slated for this year include accessibility to the Community
Center at entrance 5/6 located in the-middle of the east elevation, as well as
handicapped improvements to a pair of lst floor restrooms.
With funds carried over from Year XV, we also propose to upgrade a pair of
restrooms at Braemar Arena.
Serving Bloomington,
Eden Prairie, Richfield
and Edina
N iR IPM CA F111 �
Household & Outsce Maintenance for Elderly
March 5, 1990
Mr. Craig Larsen
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Craig,
This letter is a request by HOME for $24,450 of Year XVI CDBG funds from
the City of Edina. The allocation will be used to support maintenance and
chore services to 170 Edina elderly and disabled households between July
1, 1990 and June 30, 1991.
The need for services to Edina increased again in 1989 and this trend is
expected to continue.
Households Hrs. of Service
1988 152 3640
1989 164 4209
Additional data collected from HOME clients reflect the essential need for
these services: 56% were 75+ years of age, 69f had disabilities, 647 had
Incomes of less than $10,000 /year, and 80Too are women living alone.
HOME is aware that national CDBG funding appropriations may decrease in
Year XVI. To help accommodate that change HOME has limited its Year XVI
request to a 5% increase even though services levels in Edina rose by more
than 10°70 in 1989.
On January 1, 1990 HOME services were transferred from the South
Hennepin Human Services Council to Senior Community Services of
Hopkins. Senior Community Service's commitment is to quality services
for the elderly and you can be assured that HOME will continue to be
responsive to the needs of Edina's elderly and disabled residents in 1990.
Sincerely,
0r_1 W
Don Hauge, Prog m Director
HOME South Hennepin Human Services Council Creekside Center
9801 Penn Ave. So. Room 100 Bloomington, MN 55431 (612) 888 -5530
H.O.M.E. (Household and Outside Maintenance for Elderly)
Summary of Service 1989
MAINTENANCE HOMEMAKER TOTAL
BLOOMINGTON
# of
Customers
225
122
347
# of
Households
204
100
304
# of
Jobs
910
1,481
2,391.
# of
Hours
2,816
3,319
6,135
EDINA
# of
Customers
104
81
185
# of
Households
89
75'
164
# of
Jobs
814
1,114
1,928
# of
Hours
1,767
2,442
4,209
RICHFIELD
# of
Customers
144
40
.184
# of
Households
137
40
177
# of
Jobs
872
538
1,410
# of
Hours
2,190
1,254
3,444
EDEN
PRAIRIE
# of
Customers
20
7
27
# of
Households
17
6
23
# of
Jobs
48
29
77
# of
Hours
311
75
386
ST. LOUIS PARK
# of
Customers
15
15
# of
Households
14
14
# of
Jobs
23
23
# of
Hours
245
245
TOTAL
# of
Customers
508
250
743
# of
Households
461
221
668
# of
Jobs
2,667
3,162
5,829
# of
Hours
7,329
7,090
14,419
February 28, 1990
Mr. Craig Larson
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Larson:
On behalf of your citizens in need, I am requesting that
Edina consider allocating $20,000 of your Community
Development Block Grant money to the child care sliding fee
subsidy program for your helping 7 families, and there are
12 eligible Edina families on the waiting list. I have
enclosed some information about the families now being
served.
In addition to the waiting list as proof of need for this
program, you may be aware of the more general reports.
Currently there are 7500 eligible families in Minnesota on
the waiting list - and the list is growing. The Federal
Welfare Reform Act has put additional pressure on the
sliding fee child care.money by setting priorities for child
care assistance and encouraging AFDC recipients to move
toward self= sufficiency. So many women have take advantage
of this program, that state and county money is used to help
these families, and is not available for the "working poor ",
who also need help paying for child care if they are going
to be able to afford to continue to work. Also, the
guidelines have been adjusted for inflation for the sliding
fee subsidy, so families can stay on the program longer as
their incomes rise, though the subsidy will decrease. The
waiting lists continue to grow, and it is estimated that no
families will be moved off the county /state waiting list and
on to the program for 10 months or longer.
So your city's program is needed more than ever by your
residents.
Thank you for your past support of the subsidy program. I
would be glad to get any more information about it for you.
I will try to attend the meeting at which the Council
decides on their CDBG priorities to answer questions then.
Sincerely,
Grace Norris
Community Liaison
GN /co
Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association
Dale Anderson, Executive Director a 1628 Elliot Ave. S. • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55404 9 (612) 341 -1177
w.
WCoopereting Fund Drive
iZ6 LL41;�
PARENTS ASSISTANCE FUND (PAF)
STATISTICAL REPORT FOR THE CITY OF
FROM 711
-7
FAMILY
SIZE
CHILDREN IN
DAY CARE'
MARITAL.
STATUS
GROSS INCOME
RACE
'5 CO. °°
of
s ILI'
�'--
�
00
4iJu� -C'
O1
1t4
/Cn
O
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: KEN ROSLAND, MANAGER
From: MARCELLA DAEHN , CLERK
Date: MARCH 16, 1990
Subject: ORDINANCE NO. 1031 -A3
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #
IV . A
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr . Recommends
❑
To HRA
7
To Council
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
a]
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
First Reading of Ordinance No. 1031 -A3 To Define Noxious Weeds, Provide for
Cutting and Removal, Provide for Charging Cost, and Penalty.
Info /Background:
As directed by the Council, Attorney Erickson has drafted an amendment to
Ordinance No. 1031 reglating to removal of noxious weeds and other rank growths
of vegetation. The amendment incorporates as much as possible of the provisions
of Minnesota Statute 18.171, which is attached.
The amendment would define noxious weeds, provide for cutting and removal,
allowsthe weed inspector or assistant weed inspector to enter upon property
to cut and remove weeds or rank growths of vegetation and provides for charging
the cost against the owner or occupant of the property and changes the
penalty for ordinance violation.
•
3751g
ORDINANCE NO. 1031 -A3
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1031 TO DEFINE
NOXIOUS WEEDS, PROVIDE FOR CUTTING AND REMOVAL
OF NOXIOUS WEEDS AND OTHER VEGETATION, PROVIDE FOR CHARGING
THE COST OF SUCH CUTTING AND REMOVAL,
AND CHANGING THE PENALTY
The City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, ordains:
Section 1. Sec. 5 of Ordinance No. 1031 is hereby renumbered to
Sec. 6, and a new Sec. 5 is hereby added as follows:
"Sec. 5. Noxious Weeds and Other Vegetation: Removal;
Assessing Costs. ,
(a) Noxious weeds, as used in this ordinance, shall
be those plants which are determined, from time to time, to
be noxious weeds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 1990,
Section 18.171, Subd. 5.
(b) The weed inspector or assistant weed inspector of
the City may enter upon property to cut, remove, destroy
and eradicate rank growths.of vegetation, including grass
or weeds, which are a nuisance under Sec. 2(e) of this
ordinance, and also noxious weeds.
(c) Such entry by the weed inspector or assistant
weed inspector shall be done only after written notice is
served upon the owner and the occupant, if other than the
owner, of the property to be entered, and failure of the
owner or occupant to cut down, remove, destroy or eradicate
the noxious weeds, or rank growths of vegetation, within
the time, and in such manner, as the weed inspector or
assistant weed inspector shall designate in such notice.
Such notice shall be given in the manner prescribed by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.271, Subd. 2, and shall
allow a minimum of seven (7) days for the property owner or
occupant to comply with requirements of said notice.
(d) The costs and expenses incurred by the City in
connection with entering a property pursuant. to (c) of this
Section, and cutting, removing, destroying and eradicating
noxious weeds and rank growths of vegetation, shall be paid
by the owner or occupant of the property-entered pursuant
to a notice containing the information and served as
prescribed by Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.271, Subd. 4.
-1-
If the City is not paid the amount stated in the notice
within thirty (30) days or before the following October 1,
whichever is later,.such amount shall become a lien in .
favor of the City and a penalty of eight percent (8 %) shall
be certified to the auditor of Hennepin County for entry as
a tax upon such property, all pursuant to the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.271, Subd. 4.1-
Sec. 2. The penalty provisions of Sec. 6 of Ordinance No. 1031
are hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 6. Penalty. Any person who violates any
provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and subject to the penalties set forth in
Ordinance No. 175 in addition to the costs and taxes
charged by this ordinance."
Sec. 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on its
passage and publication.
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Published in the
Attest:
City Clerk
-2-
on
Mayor
# 18.171
PLANT AND ANIMAL PEST CONTROL
Subd. 6. Noxious weeds. "Noxious weeds" meanq the annual, biennial, and perennial
plants which are deemed by the commissioner, by commissioner's order, to be injurious to
public health, public roads, crops, livestock, and other property. The eommissione>✓s
orders under this subdivision are not subject to chapter 14.
18.271. Destroying weed&; notices; expenw
Subdivision 1. Notice to eradicate. Notices for control and eradication of noxious
weeds shall consist of two kinds: general notices and individual notices, of a form
prescribed by the commissioner. General notice shall be published by each local weed and
seed inspector of township, municipality or county, in one or more legal newspapers of
general circulation throughout the area over which the weed inspector has jurisdiction, on
or before June 15th of each year, and at such other time as the commissioner may direct
or the local weed inspectors may determine. Failure of weed inspectors to publish
general weed notices or to serve individual notices herein provided does not relieve any
person from the necessity of full compliance with any or all provisions of this chapter and
rules thereunder. In all cases said published notice shall be deemed legal and sufficient
notice.
Subd. 2. Service, A local weed inspector, who finds it necessary to secure more
prompt or definite control or eradication of noxious weeds in certain special or individual
instances involving one or a limited number of persons than is accomplished by the
general published notices, shall cause to be served individual notices in writing upon the
owner and occupant, d other than the owner, 8 firing specific instructions and methods
when and how certain named weeds are to be controlled or eradicated Such methods of
control may 6iclude definite systems of t[Uge, cropping, management and use of
livestock. AD individual notices provided for herein shall be served in the same manner
as a summons in a civil action in the district court or by certified mail. Service on persons
living temporarily or permanently outside of the local weed inspectors' jurisdiction whose
property is vacant or unoccupied may be made by sending the notice by certified mail to
the last known address of such person, to be ascertained, if necessary, from the last tai
list in the county treasurer's office.
Subd. 4. Costs and expenses. Notwithstanding the provi-
sions of subdivision 3 as they relate to procedures for payment
of costs and expenses incurred, when the local weed inspector or
the assistant weed inspector of a city shall cause noxious weeds
to be cut down, destroyed, or otherwise eradicated on property
within such city under the authority of this section, the follow-
ing procedures shall apply for costs and expenses thus incurred.
Notice in writing of the work done and the costs and expenses
involved shall be served on the owner or occupant of the proper-
ty in accordance with the individual notice provisions of subdivi-
sion 2. Such notice shall provide a tabulation of the total costs
and expenses involved and shall indicate that if the total amount
is not paid to the city within 30 days or before the following Oc-
tober 1, whichever is later, the costs and expenses shall become a
lien in favor of the city and a penalty of eight percent will be
added to the amount due as of that date with the total costs, ex-
penses, and penalty thereupon to be certified to the county audi-
tor and entered by him on his tax books as a tax upon such land.
Amounts collected by the county auditor under the provisions
of this subdivision when collected shall be paid to the city to
reimburse it for its expenditures in this regard.
Amended by Laws 1945, c. 634, § 8; Laws 1951, c. 466, § 7; Laws
1957, c. 724, 1§ 13, 14; Laws 1961, c. 642, § 3; Laws 1965, c. 285, §
6; Laws 1969, c. 715, § 1, eff. May 25, 1969; Uwe 1971, c. 641, 1 1,
eff. June 2, 1971; Laws 1974, c. 290, 11.
Oi
I
Jw
O
!_�)9
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: KEN ROSLAND , 11ANAGER
Agenda Item #
Iy . B
From: MARCELLA DAEHN, CLERK
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Date: MARCH ' 16 , 1990
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject: ORDINANCE NO. 451 -A7
To Council
Action
❑
Motion
i
�
❑Resolution
0
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Adoption of Ordinance No. 451 -A7, with waiver of Second Reading.
Info /Background:
On October 16, 1989 the Council adopted Ordinance No. 451 -A6 which amended
the sign ordinance by adding regulations for the Mixed Development District.
A copy of the ordinance amendment is attached for reference.
Inadvertently the ordinance was published containing an error relating to
the square feet allowed per sign in the 11DD -6 District, e.g. 1000 square
feet instead of 100 square feet.
Ordinance No. 451 -A7 would amend the ordinance to correct the error.
ORDINANCE NO. 451 -A7
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 451
TO CORRECT ERROR THEREIN REIATING TO SIZE OF SIGN
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 5, paragraph (h)(1)(d) of Ordinance No. 451 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
(d) MDD -6 District: One sign per development not to exceed 1999 100
square feet in area. For developments with more than one street
frontage, one additional sign per street frontage provided each
additional sign does not exceed 70 square feet in area.
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
and publication.
First Reading:
Second Reading:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
81 -7
Mayor
r/f
C;� r
ORDINANCE NO. 451 -A6
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 451
BY ADDING REGULATIONS FOR
MIXED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. •Section 5, paragraph (h) (1) of Ordinance No. 451 is hereby amended
by adding the following:
(d) MDD -6 District: One sign per development not to exceed 1000 square
feet in area. For developments with more than one street frontage,
one additional sign per street frontage provided each additional
sign does not exceed 70 square feet in area.
Sec. 2. Section 5, paragraph (h) is hereby amended by adding the following
subparagraphs:
(10) Project Identification Signs in MDD -6 District: One free - standing
sign for each project per street frontage. The total area of a
free - standing sign shall not exceed 50 square feet.
(11) Retail Signs: The total area of all wall signs affixed to a
building wall shall not exceed 158 of total area of that wall.
No signs shall be placed on walls of buildings used for
non - residential purposes which walls directly face, abut or
adjoin a public park or residential use as such parks or uses
are shown on the finally approved Overall Development Plan.
(12) Suites Hotels:
(a) Wall Signs: The total area of all wall signs affixed to a
building shall not exceed 158 of the total area of that
wall. No signs shall be placed on walls of buildings used
for non - residential purposes which walls directly face,
abut or adjoin a public park or residential use as such
parks or uses are shown on the finally approved Overall
Development Plan.
(b) Free - standing Signs: One free - standing sign for each
building per street frontage. The total area of a
free - standing sign for a building having one street
frontage shall not exceed 100 square feet. Where a
building has two or more street frontages, additional
permitted free - standing signs shall not exceed 50 square
feet in area. The maximum height of free - standing signs
shall be 25 feet.
81 -6
Ordinance No. 451 -A6
Page 2
Sec. 3. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 451 is hereby amended by adding the
following definition:
(bb) "Project" in the Mixed Development District means a multi - family
residential complex containing 10 or more units, a shopping center or area,
theatre complex containing five or more screens, an office building complex
containing three or more buildings, or a public institutional or recreational use.
Sec. 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and
publication.
First Reading: October 2, 1989
Second Reading: October,16, 1989
Published in the Edina Sun - Current on October 25, 1989
/s/ FREDERICK S. RICHARDS
.Mayor
ATTEST:
s/ MARCELLA M. DAEHN
City Clerk
a
'(n REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
1 � �40
�-;
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: 19 March, 1990 AGENDA ITEM VI.B.
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Water Treatment Chemicals. - City Wells
Companv Amount of Quote or 13id
1. Hawkins Chemical, Inc. 1. $ 48.25
2. Dixie Petro -Chem, Inc. 2. No Bid
3. 3.
4. 4.
5. 5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
Hawkins Chemical, Inc. $ 48.25
This bid is for 100 lbs. of hydrofluosilicic acid and 100 lbs. of
liquid chlorine.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This bid establishes the annual price -for water treatment chemicals
(hydrofluosilicic acid and liquid chlorine),. This price will be
valid until March 31, 1991. These chemicals are purchased as needed
to properly treat City water per state regulations. The bid price
is approximately 10% lower than last year's prices.
Sign ure
The Recommended bid is _
within budget not
Kenneth Roslanb, City Manager
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
�ch
;
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Bob Kojetin
VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT. REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,00o
DATE: March 12, 1990
ITEM DESCRIPTION: John Deere Mower
Company
1 - Scharber & Sons
2. Gruber Power - Maplewood
3. Jerrys Hardware - Edina
4.
5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
Scharber & Sons - $6.550.00
GENERAL INFORMATION:
AGENDA ITEM vi . c
Amount of Quote or Bid
1. $6,550.00
2. $7,635.00
3. $7,718.00
4.
5.
ITew John Deere 915 Diesel Mower with 60 inch rear discharge
deck - Trading in Toro Grounds master
Si
The Recommended bid is
Department ,
within budget not within
Kenneth Rosland. City
Wallin, Fir)ance Director
10i, REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
• ikbnr�u•��J
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Bob Kojetin, Director or Park and Recreation
VIA: Kenneth Rosland City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5 000
DATE: March 13,-1990
AGENDA ITEM VI.D
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Greensmaster mower for Golf Course
Company Amount of Quote or Bid
1 - MTI Distributing 1.$8,067
2. North Star Turf 2.$8,080
3. 3.
4. 4.
5. 5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
MTI Distributing $8,067
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Toro Greensmaster 3000, 16 h.p. gas engine, single point adjustment
cutting units, 11 blade reel, Wiehle front roller, full rear roller,
brushes. Replacement vehicle
The Recommended bid is ___X_
within budget not within bu�Qe'
Kenneth
Wallin, Finance Director
City Manager
�91r7A. ;`r�'lr
° '` 0. REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Bob Kojetin, Director of Park and Recreation
VIA: Kenneth Rosland City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000
DATE: March 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM VI.E
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Cushman Turf Truckster
Company Amount of Quote or Bid
1. Cushman 1.$8,355.00
2• Horst Distributing 2.$8,650.00
3. 3.
4. 4
5 • .5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
Cushman $8,355.00
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Cushman Truckster model 63090 for Golf Course. Replacement vehicle.
The Recommended bid is - x
within budget not
Kenneth
Wallin, Firlifince Director
City Manager
,%T4 A. A1p.
e_ '5 En REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
H 1y 0.:
�b1111Mw��
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: 19 March, 1990
AGENDA ITEM v I. F.
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Emergency Repair - 72nd Street Lift Station -
CompanV Flygt Pump ;
Amount of Quote or &d
1• Waldor Pump $ 6,848.77
2. 2.
3. 3.
4. 4.
5. 5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
Waldor Pump
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This is an emergency
lift station at West
sole supplier in the
A bearing failure cap
overhaul. Funds for
Fund.
$ 6,848.77
repair to our large sanitary sewer
72nd Street. Waldor Pump is the
local area for this type of pump.
ised damage which required a major
this repair are from the Utility
Public Works - Utilities
Sig atur - De P artme
The Recommended bid is �--
within budget not witho bu et n Wallin, Finande Director
Kenneth Rosland,'City
�f
VII. A.
MINUTES
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
MARCH 13, 1990
9:00 A.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Fran Hoffman, Chairman
Alison Fuhr
Gordon Hughes
Bob Sherman
Craig Swanson
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Ms. C. Miller, Honeywell, 5901 Lincoln Drive
Ms. M. Halvorson, 5217 Halifax Avenue South
Mr. and Mrs. Charles Schneider, 5200 Halifax Avenue South
Captain Leonard Kleven, Edina Police Department
Ms. Joan Waterstreet, Edina Police Department
SECTION A
Requests on which the Committee recommends approval as requested or modified,
and the Council's authorization of recommended action.
(1) Discuss traffic safety concerns at the entrance to Honeywell, 5901 Lincoln
Drive.
Request received from Carol Miller, Building Manager, Honeywell, 5901
Lincoln Drive.
ACTION TAKEN:
Mr. Hoffman reviewed for the Committee and those present what had tran-
spired to date. When Honeywell began their expansion, they had planned to
incorporate an additional driveway out of the complex on Londonderry Drive.
This plan, however, was not approved by either the Planning Commission or
the City Council. Their advice was to put the current plan into effect and
if problems arose, to contact the Council at that time.
Ms. Miller stated that Honeywell is not really experiencing significant
problems with the current plan. However, her request was more to study
what might be done to further insure pedestrian safety and the safety of
those leaving the driveway and turning southbound on Lincoln Drive. Her
suggestion was three -fold: (1) request for blind intersection signing on
southbound Lincoln Drive, (2) crosshatching or similar pedestrian markings
to extend from driveway to bus stop located directly across'street, and
(3) repainting of the faded double yellow line in this area.
Mr. Hoffman questioned Ms. Miller as to the percentages of total traffic
that leaves Honeywell to proceed southbound on Lincoln Drive, and also the
numbers of pedestrians crossing to the bus stop area. Ms. Miller did not
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
March 13, 1990
Page 2
have exact figures but stated that in both instances, it was a minority of
the employees.
Captain Kleven reviewed the last three year's accidents statistics in this
area. There were a total of three reportable accidents, two of.those being
hit and run accidents, and one due to icy road conditions just north of
the driveway.
Mr. Swanson asked if any thought had been given to further construction of
a more northerly driveway out of the complex and Mr. Hughes also asked
about the south side. Ms. Miller's answer to both suggestions was that'
it is somewhat of a neighborhood issue which Honeywell would prefer not
to infringe upon. Based on the fact that Honeywell has flex hours to-some-
what control traffic flow and that no great problems have arisen from the
present system, Ms. Miller did not feel additional driveway construction
would be pursued.
Mr. Swanson stated that the crosshatching would, in effect, specify a mid -
block crosswalk without any control device's and, therefore, he would not
suggest this option in consideration of the Committee's previous stance
regarding mid -block crosswalks. Mrs. Fuhr wondered if moving the bus stop
north and addition of pedestrian signs might create more of an impact on
the southbound driver in the consideration of pedestrians ahead.
Mr. Swanson moved to install "COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY AHEAD - USE CAUTION"
signs and two Pedestrian signs on Lincoln Drive, and also to repaint the
double yellow striping in the area. Mr. Hughes seconded the motion.
Motion carried 5 -0.
(2) Request for "NO PARKING ANYTIME" signs on the east side of Drew Avenue,
6500 block.
Request received from Fran Hoffman, Edina Engineering Department.
ACTION TAKEN:
The request by Mr. Hoffman came about due to recent paid parking imple-
mentation at the Southdale Medical Building and Hospital. More and more
employees and patrons are now parking on the east side of Drew Avenue
which did lead to problems.
Mrs. Fuhr moved to install "NO PARKING ANYTIME" signs on the east side
of Drew Avenue. 30' from the Public intersections and 15' from the private
driveways. Mr. Sherman seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 -0.
SECTION B
Requests on which the Committee recommends denial of request.
None.
r
i
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMITTEE MINUTES
March 13, 1990
Page 3
SECTION C
Requests which are deferred to a later date or referred to others.
(1) Discuss pedestrian safety concerns on West 50th Street between Halifax
Avenue and France Avenue.
Request received from Charles and Rose Schneider, 5200 Halifax Avenue
South.
ACTION TAKEN:
In reviewing a letter received from Mr. and Mrs. Schneider, Mr. Hoffman
stated that he felt three issues needed to be addressed, (1) the walk
signal at West 50th Street and Halifax Avenue, (2) the permitting of
right turn on red at this intersection, and (3) how well does the driving
public pay attention to the pedestrian in the crosswalk area.
Mr. and Mrs. Schneider stated that they have never seen traffic volumes
higher in this area and they feel unsafe conditions are present for those
crossing here. Most drivers either do not see pedestrians in the•cross-
walk or they are in a hurry and choose to ignore those who are legally
crossing on a "WALK" signal. They also stated that further confusion
exists because some pedestrians will automatically start crossing on a
green light without waiting for the "WALK" signal to light.
Captain Kleven reviewed three years of accidents statistics in the area
encompassing West 50th Street from France Avenue to Halifax Avenue. There
have been numerous accidents, 12 of those being at the intersection of
Halifax and West 50th and 29 at the intersection of France and West 50th
Street. He also stated that the Traffic Enforcement Unit also has been
assigned at the intersection during the months of May through September
specifically to try to alleviate this problem. Most of their work, how-
ever, must be done on foot as the parking of a marked squad in the area
poses a safety concern in the already congested area. Captain Kleven also
stated that the worst'concerns are normally during the Art Fair, where a
lot of jay - walking occurs and we have had mid -block accidents in the past.
Mrs. Fuhr asked about the possibility of stopping traffic in all directions
at the same time to allow safe crossing for pedestrians. She stated that
in recent travels she has seen this option used in other states and it
appears to be effective. Mr. Hughes and Mr. Swanson both expressed con-
cern regarding backup of traffic if this were considered. At present,
especially during the peak hours, traffic may already backup for several
blocks. Mr. Hoffman felt that Mrs. Fuhr's suggestion merited consideration
and possible review by an outside engineering consultant. Mrs. Fuhr said
that this area is more pedestrian- oriented than vehicle- oriented and there-
fore these concerns should be weighed heavily. Mr. Swanson, citing that
over 21,000 vehicles pass through this area per day, disagreed with this
assessment and continued to express concern regarding backup. He felt that
from an engineering standpoint, there was not much left to be done and
therefore the Merchant's Association should be contacted and allowed to
express their views and suggestions. Also Mr. Hughes commented that the
more congestion experienced at the intersection, the more vehicles would
begin diverting through other residential streets.
r
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
March 13, 1990
Page 4
Mr. Hughes moved to refer this item to the Merchant's Association articu-
lating some of the Committee's view and comments and asking for a response
by next month's meeting. Mr. Sherman seconded the motion. Motion carried
5 -0.
EDINA TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
i
o,
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis Hoffman
City Engineer /
Date: 19 March, 1990
Subject: France Avenue -
W. 70th St. to
Minnesota Dr.
Construction Cooperativ
Agreement with
Hennepin County
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #
VII. B.
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
0
To Council
Action
0
Motion
El
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
A. Approve the Cooperative Construction Agreement.
B. Authorize Mayor and Manager to sign agreement.
C. Authorize resolution for state aid funds.
Info/Background-
This is the last step in the process to approve of the construction project
on France Avenue from West 70th Street to Minnesota Drive. This project
will satisfy one of the indirect source permit requirements for the
Centennial lakes project. This project will also provide for intersection
changes at West 70th Street, Hazelton Road, and West 76th Street on France
Avenue that should meet out future traffic projections for those
intersections.
This project is a federal aid to urban roadways project and federal aid will
fund 578 of the eligible construction items on France Avenue. The estimated
federal participation is $1.13 million. The estimated total project cost is
$2.6 million which includes right -of -way costs.
The project also includes a large storm sewer in the 72nd and France area
which will connect to the Centennial Lakes project. This portion of the
project is another portion of our stormwater management plan charges. The
estimated cost for this large storm sewer is $225,000.00 and will be funded
by the stormwater utility.
ii
Report /Recommendation
France Avenue - West 70th to
Minnesota Drive Construction
Cooperative Agreement with
Hennepin County
19 March, 1990
Page Two
The balance of the project will be funded by county state aid, municipal
state aid and assessment to benefited property owners. The estimated
construction cost on the side streets (West 70th Street, Hazelton Road and
West 76th Street) is $227,000.00 and will be funded from municipal state aid
and additional costs for right -of -way will be eligible municipal state aid
costs.
The estimated City construction share on France Avenue will be approximately
$253,000.00 with approximately $100,000.00 being federal aid and the balance
from municipal state aid and assessment. Additionally, the City will have
right -of -way costs which are split with the county and eligible for
reimbursement from municipal state aid.
The right -of -way costs are all eligible from municipal state aid. The cost
split is the normal Hennepin County policy of 50 -50. As such, the potential
France Avenue right -of -way costs to the City are $305,000.00._
As such, we need to pass a resolution for state aid use of funds on France
Avenue for a not to exceed $785,000.00 (this includes engineering).
Additionally, the City would need to do the following: approve the
cooperative construction agreement, authorize Mayor and Manager to sign
agreement and reaffirm intent to special assess a portion of the cost at
$40.00 per assessable foot.
Staff will make a presentation at the City Council meeting.
C.
A.
e,o
�o
' • ,N�bRPOW`1�0 •
ieee
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis Hoffman City Engineer J�v
Date: 19 March, 1990
Subject: State Aid Route
Designations -
Additions and Deletions
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #VII. c.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
0
To Council
Action ❑
Motion
E
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Authorize a resolution which would change the municipal state route system
per the attached map.
Info /Background:
Annually, the engineering staff reviews the municipal state aid system in
Edina per annual state requirements. The City is allowed to have 20 percent
of its street mileage designated as state aid routes. These routes must
connect to other state aid routes or county /state highways.
From time to time, staff will recommend changes to the system that we
believe will encompass the major road system or expected road systems which
have high traffic volumes. The last minor changes were in 1983.
On the attached map which is divided into three sub - areas, are suggested
removals and additions to the City municipal state aid system. We are
suggesting removal of two links in the system. The two suggested routes to
be removed are:
(A) Grimes Avenue from West 44th Street to West 42nd Street and West 42nd
Street from Grimes Avenue to France Avenue (see blue color on map).
The reason for removal is the reconstruction of those roads in the
Morningside area and homeowners did not want these streets expanded to
meet state requirements. These streets were added to the system in the
late 1970's for the purpose of providing some state funds to the
Morningside project completed in 1978 -79.
Report /Recommendation
State Aid Route Designations
- Additions and Deletions
19 March, 1990
Page Two
(B) Valley View Road from County Road 18 East Frontage Road to the Valley
View Road /Braemar Boulevard intersection (see blue color on map). This
segment cannot meet state aid requirements due to the severe curves on
this segment and belief that this alignment is more properly located
serving two City park facilities.
The additions to the state aid system are as follows:
(A) Parklawn Avenue from France Avenue to York Avenue. The purpose for
this addition is the ever increasing traffic in the greater Southdale
area and the logical connection between two county roads. This road
also serves the northerly two - thirds of the Centennial Lakes
development (see red color on map).
(B) Braemar Boulevard from the Valley View Road /Braemar intersection along
Braemar past the Golf Dome to the Ikola Way intersection thence
westerly to the west side of the Braemar Arena lot, thence northerly to
the Valley View Road /County Road 18 (now 169) ramp intersection. This
alignment would serve to City facilities and move a collector status
roadway from the old segment (see red color for alignment on map).
The effect of the proposed changes would result in staying beneath the 20
percent cap in state aid mileage per state requirement. Staff believes
these are appropriate changes to the system and would recommend same. The
State Aid Office has reviewed these proposed changes and find them
consistent with the requirements.
J
C
:1
C
L
z
Li
U
POTENTIAL STATE AID REVISIONS
LA,
PA
Gv-
&
------- INDIAIhi
- A rrow tppod=-= POND
CIR
_IN A VAI I
INDIAN HI
k CIR.
•INDIAN
WAY W. J,
o.
1 0
APACHE RD
cy
TRAIL
6
A SAMUEL, Ro
slo�ux TR.
PAtU TE
L PAIUTE .iEE CIR.
rfC r11 C11 X. LLS-1W-' 151 "I'l
cc -�l
C18 T E uj
... PAIUTE >
0
PASS
X
151
4vo
LVgL Ley view -fill RO
ull
v
Z; 1�..
C)
IA J
. "'LL-A-WAY
BRAEMER
Nine
w
IN R24
718 z
cr
18 17
0
z
mi
FF LITTLE S T.
z u'
F,
L
x , ORNINGI iSIDE
U
36
/?o
170
Ld
J
J 0
RD
(L
z
a .
140':
U 171
7
15TH S T II
MATCH LINE
0 29 166
3! 32
--�_P,A,RIKLAWN AVE
T28NR24W
31 32
7 5 0
1
T27NO24W z
)9
Y'I
HAZE
Z LTr-
1!
Z2
T
0;)
Ff
m
36
/?o
170
Ld
J
J 0
RD
(L
z
a .
140':
U 171
7
15TH S T II
MATCH LINE
0 29 166
3! 32
--�_P,A,RIKLAWN AVE
T28NR24W
31 32
7 5 0
1
T27NO24W z
)9
Y'I
rf
A.
o e, tA
O
lose
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: KEN ROSLAND, MANAGER
Agenda Item ##
-YII.D
From: CRAIG SWANSON,
Consent
❑
CHIEF OF POLICE
Information Only
0
Date: MARCH 16, 1990
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject: DOG LICENSING
❑
To Council
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
i
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Info /Background:
As requested by the Council, the attached report summarizes background
information regarding licensing of dogs in the City and provides an estimate
as to cost of mailing out renewal notices.
�l
i'
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Kenneth E. Rosland-
-FROM:— Craig -G— Swanson
SUBJECT: Dog Licensing
DATE: March 16, 1990
At the March 5, 1990, Council meeting, questions arose regarding
notification to dog owners for license renewal. Facts about licensing
include:
* Rationale for licensing:
- A means of identifying stray or lost dogs and establishing proof
of ownership.
- A mechanism for assuring that animals are vaccinated against
rabies.
* Total licenses issued:
1989 - 570
1988 - 585
1987 - 629
* Renewals:
55% previously licensed
34% licensed during preceding year
11% never licensed before
* Estimates of the dog population:
- Approximately 1,000 dogs licensed during 1984 -1989.
- 60%+ of dogs are never licensed.
- Estimated 2,500 dog population in Edina.
* Renewal mailout cost (1,000 addresses):
printed mailer - $300.00
postage - 140.00
labels - 28.00
staff time (mailout only) - 60.00
$528.00
I recommend a renewal mailout. It will generate a larger percentage of
renewals. Revenue from the renewals will generate $2,000 to $4,000. I
further recommend that this revenue be used to attack the larger problem of
unlicensed dogs.
If ou have questions or comments, please contact me.
CRAIG SWANSON
CHIEF F POLICE
Agenda Item VII.E
I , 'D pv
.M
CAM LOMMIS%iorJe
,,�sSnCt I/�''i'�0ry ►4S ►4voluN�i��
M) ►.;F� lo�v� �`�rni� R�s�d�W�
w91N A.1�'lr
o e
�° REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
leas
To: KEN ROSLAND, MANAGER
Agenda Item #=. Y
From: MARCELLA DAEHN, CLERK
Consent
0
Information Only
F_�
Date: MARCH 17, 1990
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject: BEER LICENSE RENEWALS
Ul
To Council
Action
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Council approval of the beer license renewals as listed.
Info /Background:
In accordance with Ordinance No. 902, beer licenses require approval by the City
Council before they can be issued. The following applications for renewal have
been approved by the Police and Health Departments and are ready for Council approval.
On -Sale 3.2 Beer License Renewal
Biltmore Bowl
Braemar Golf Course
Braemar Golf Dome
Bravo! Italian Specialties
Corelli's Pizza & Pasta
Daytons Food Service
Edina American Legion Post
Empress Restaurant
Off -Sale 3.2 Beer License Renewal
Edina Superette
Holiday Stations Inc.
Kennys Markets
Jerrys Foods (also off -sale)
Original Pancake House
Pantry Restaurant
Southdale Bowl
Szechuan Star Restaurant
T J's Family Restaurant
The Lotus III
Country Store
Superamerica Station
w91�1r�
A.
o e 4 _
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
,see
To: KEN ROSLAND, MANAGER
Agenda Item #
VII.G
From: MARCELLA DAEHN, CLERK
Consent
7
Information Only
❑
Date: MARCH 15, 1990
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject: CHANGE OF POLLING
Eil
To Council
LOCATION FOR PRECINCT 20
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation: Adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina,. Minnesota that the
polling place for Precinct 20 in the City of Edina be changed from Wooddale
Montessori Acadamy (old Cahill School), 5601 W. 70th Street to Brookview Church,
5015 W. 70th Street.
Info/ Background:
Voters in Precinct No. 20 have been voting at Wooddale Montessori Academy,
(old Cahill School building). As you are aware, that property is being proposed
for redevelopment.
I have contacted the pastor and Directorate at Brookview Church and have obtained
permission to use their facility for elections. I would recommend that the Council
approve Brookview Church as the polling place for Precinct No. 20.
Agenda Item VIII.A
JOHN KEEFS =• �u co PHONE
COMMISSIONER 348 -3087
M Na lt
BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487 -0240
March 7, 1990
The Honorable Frederick S. Richards
Mayor, City of Edina
4801 West 511th Street
Edina; MN 55424
Dear Mayor Richards:
The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners would like to invite you,
the city council and appropriate staff to the annual Recycling
Recognition Luncheon. We will review the status of the Recycling
Program in Hennepin County and recognize those municipalities,
institutions and businesses who have made outstanding contributions to
recycling.
In 1989, we far exceeded the Metropolitan Council's goal of 13%
abatement of our solid waste stream. We hope you will join us and
other elected officials for this important event.
Recycling Recognition Luncheon
Wednesday, April 18, 1990
11:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m.
Sheraton Park Place Hotel
5555 Wayzata Boulevard
St. Louis Park
R.S.V.P. Mike Natysin at 348 -4077 by April 11. '
Sincerely,
John Keefe t i
Commi issioner
1
cc! Mr. Kenneth E. Rosland, Manager
A.
e t _
ch
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
�'N�Aee�S�V •
Recommendation:
Info /Background:
The Eden Prairie City Council on March 13, 1990 adopted the attached resolution
opposing the expansion of the Flying Cloud Landfill.
Manager Carl Jullie contacted me today advising that the Eden Prairie Council
has asked that the Edina City Council adopt a resolution supporting Eden
Prairie's position.
To:
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
Agenda Item #
VTTI.B
From:
KEN ROSLAND, MANAGER
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Date:
MARCx 15, 1990
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject:
REQUEST OF CITY OF EDEN
❑
To Council
PRAIRIE REGARDING
FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Info /Background:
The Eden Prairie City Council on March 13, 1990 adopted the attached resolution
opposing the expansion of the Flying Cloud Landfill.
Manager Carl Jullie contacted me today advising that the Eden Prairie Council
has asked that the Edina City Council adopt a resolution supporting Eden
Prairie's position.
a
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90- '72
A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE
EXPANSION OF THE FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL
WHEREAS, Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc.; a subsidiary of BFI Waste
Systems, has applied to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for a permit to
expand the Flying Cloud Landfill in Eden Prairie by adding approximately 5,000
acre feet of waste to the existing, contaminated waste deposits, and
WHEREAS, the City has retained experts in toxicology and related sciences
who have warned that such expansion may lead to a public health hazard for the
approximately 900 persons living between 750 to 2,000 feet from the proposed
expansion limits, an
WHEREAS, the present landfill which was proposed to be closed permanently
in 1982 has caused contamination of the groundwater,-escape of methane gas,
noise, odor and dust problems for nearby residents, and
WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration has recently indicated its
opposition to the expansion due to adverse impacts on the nearby Flying Cloud
Airport, and
WHEREAS, the expansion would occur on sandy, porous soils which do not
provide the natural safeguards needed to protect against the escape of
contaminants to the groundwater, adjacent residences, and the Minnesota Valley
Wildlife refuge and the Minnesota River, and
WHEREAS, for these and other reasons, the proposed expansion represents a
serious threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and
environment of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED 8Y THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the City of Eden Prairie remains unalterably opposed to
any expansion of the Flying Cloud Landfill;
2. That copies of this resolution be directed to other city councils
requesting their understanding and political support of our
efforts to defeat this unthinkable intrusion into a fully developed
residential neighborhood.
ADOPTED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL THIS 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 1990.
SEAL
John D. Frane, City C er
F-O 'd Z70 -1 3 I d I ddd N3Q3 d0 J,1 I 0 : W06J
ayor, Gary D. Peterson
EZOSLZ6 -6:01 Lti :Si 06, bZ dW
Agenda Itern VIII.0
SAM S. SIVANICH -, PHONE
CHAIRMAN <' "'`•''1'F" 348 -3082
BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487
March 14, 1990
The Honorable Frederick S. Richards
Mayor, City or Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mayor Richards:
As you may be aware, the cities of Minneapolis and Elk River have
contracted with Larkin, Hoffman, Daly and Lindgren to lobby State
legislators in favor of a legislative amendment to the Waste
Management Act which would instate "host fees" for solid waste
facilities located in those cities (HF 2108, SF 1996). While Hennepin
County is very concerned about ensuring that cities which host such
facilities are compensated fairly for any expenses which are incurred
in relation to those facilities, we strongly object to the fee which
is now being lobbied, that being a $1 per cubi_yard fee. This
concept does not make any attempt to draw a relationship between costs
incurred and the level of compensation to a municipality, and in
addition, it ignores any agreements which have been worked out between
the County and the cities of Minneapolis and Elk River to fund excess
costs.
Hennepin County has worked closely with communities to solve our
massive solid waste problem,, but we need your help to fight continuing
pressures to increase the tip fee, which is already Lip to $95 /ton. If
the $1 per cubic yard host fee legislation is passed, your
constituents will be required to absorb additional fees totalling $1.8
million in order to fund programs in Minneapolis and Elk River which
the County feels are above and beyond fair compensation for hosting
solid waste facilities.
a ely,
40%-�
Sam S. Sivanich
Chairman
cc: Mr. Kenneth E. Rosland, Manager
o e 41. �.
�°
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
•' - �VRPOMt�O •
iBeB
To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
Agenda Item #
x.A.
From: KENNETH ROSLAND,
Consent
❑
CITY MANAGER
-
Information Only
0
Date: MARCH 19, 1990
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
S_ ubject:
❑
To Council
STRATEGIC PLANNING
Action
El
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
0
Discussion
Recommendation:
Info /Background:
Attached are the following items which were discussed at our March 12,
1990, Strategic Planning Retreat:
1) 1990 Internal Assessment /Management Goals
2) Major Accomplishments - 1989
3) A Summary of the Strategic Planning Session provided by Barbara Arney
The next step in this process is preparation of a work plan based on the
issues that were identified.
Agenda Item X.A
1990 INTERNAL ASSESSMENTS /MANAGEMENT GOALS
• Create a M.I.S. steering committee to evaluate our existing systems and per-
form short and long range planning for information systems within the City -
(LOGIS).
• Provide a user guide of solutions for the computers to "frequently asked ques-
tions or problems" encountered with our most popular programs.
• Remodel Vernon Avenue liquor store including shelving, counters, flow of traf-
fic and lighting.
• Credit card analysis and Implementation for liquor stores.
. Implement decentralized .buying program for liquor stores to take into account
differing clientele at each store.
• Continued work on inventory levels at liquor stores - achieve 45 to 60 day
supply.
• Reorganize wines by type (i.e., cabernets, chardonnays, zinfandels) to take ad-
vantage of changing markets at 50th Street and York stores.
• Analyze pricing system for all liquor stores.
• Bottle shop feasibility analysis.
• Complete establishment of retail T.I.F. districts.
• Kunz/Lewis /School Bus Garage project.
• Secure best possible financial position in light of S.E. Edina homestead prob-
lem.
• Finish futures commission work.
• Commence 50th & France project.
• To increase the level of participation in the existing recycling program.
• To plan the implementation of apartment and condominium recycling program.
• To plan for pickup of plastics in 1991.
0
n
• To work with other cities in calling for a stable and fair county funding policy
regarding recycling and yard wastes.
• Implementation of flex benefits program.
- - - - • Risk management-- training for- accident Investigation-. -- - - - - -
• Sexual harassment awareness program.
• Wellness program.
• Revisit affirmative action plan.
• Drug testing exploration.
• Construction of West 69th Street - France to Xerxes.
• Completion of Phase I - Centennial Lakes.
• Initiation of rule changes for commercial drivers license law.
• Golf course expansion - permit pending.
• France Avenue - West 70th to Minnesota Drive (County project).
• Several well repairs and overhauls.
• Tracy Avenue lift station overhaul.
• Stormsewer projects.
• 50th and France renovation.
• Investigate the need fora rental housing inspection and licensing program.
• Develop a coordinated program that responds to the needs of ill, disabled,
frail or dysfunctional residents who are in need of assistance.
• Improve effectiveness in housing hygiene complaint procedures.
• Implement new utility billing system.
• Computerize cash management and investment tracking.
• Rewrite of transportation and community facilities for comprehensive plan.
I,
• Develop information packet regarding rezoning housing employment (Plan-
ning Department questions).
• Installation of computerized plan review for Building Department.
- -• - Policing- 2000 project -- increasing complexity -of- the - Police- role-with attendant - -. - -
training and educational leads = retirement of 75% of management staff next
four years.
• Computerization and computer -aided dispatch to improve the management of
data and information (paperless department - digitized transmissions - com-
puterized reporting).
• Reordering of medical emergency response method.
• Development of AIDS /HIV City employee policy. -
• Training strong, backup for elections and other City Clerk responsibilities.
• Address codification and reaffirmation of ordinances.
Agenda Item X.A
MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS - 1989
• Implemented centralized purchasing of hardware and software to ensure com-
patibility among systems.
o- Trained -group of- support - staff to-operate Desktop- Publishing software to im- __
prove the quality of communications and presentations.
• Purchased and began implementation of a building permit process including
parcel history, inspector scheduling, and printing of permits. Evaluation will
continue through 1990.
• Fire Department mission and goals rewrite to City Manager.
• Fire staffing /schedule report completed for management review.
• Fire reporting software installed.
• Ambulance fee collections - new high of $380,000.
• Joint design team with labor and management for Assistant Chief positions
and promotions in Fire Department.
• Five Fire Fighters trained to hazardous material Technical Level II.
• Liquor Store inventory management report - created to analyze sales over a
six month period.
• Liquor Store reduced inventory $84,000 from 12/31/88.
• Liquor Store performed a space management study on store 3's existing wine
and liquor Inventory to determine our optimal product distribution.
• Liquor Store performed bi- monthly price comparisons to ensure competitively
priced products.
• Completion of Personnel Ordinance Handbook - distribution to staff.
• Completion of New Employee Application.
• Subdivision Ordinance redone.
• Berenberg lawsuit victory.
• Biggest year in recent times for home improvement grants.
-1-
-�i
• Cooperative community energy program started.
• New financial reporting regarding: Annual Financial Statements Profit /Loss
Statements Executive Summary
• Successful refunding of bonds realizing savings
• Jupiter and Beyond Report
• Hired a new Maintenance Janitor to maintain all Park and Recreation Depart-
ment buildings including the Art Center. This has had a tremendous impact
on the upkeep and the overall appearance of all our facilities.
• Finished upgrading and preparation .for Van Valkenburg Softball Complex:
Construction of new shelter building and concession stand.
• Edina Historical Museum at Arneson Acres.
• Expansion of the Art Center.
• Complete paving of walking path at Lake Cornelia and refurbishing of trash
containers, picnic tables and bleachers.
• Reconstruction of hard surface area at Countryside Park.
• Total new playground equipment at McGuire Park.
• New filter and pump backwash.system at municipal pool.
• Moved Edina Senior Center.
• Replaced 250 large trees due to drought.
• Improved information and identification regarding private water wells.
• Passed food establishment inspection program as surveyed by the Minnesota
Department of Health.
• Health Department handled ten housing hygiene complaints in 1989. This is
an all time high for this type of complaint.
Issued 1,018 building construction permits with a value of $100,000,000. First
time over 1,000.
• 4,000 inspections, previous high 39240.
-27-
• Fees collected - $810,000, highest by $509000.
• Centennial Lakes - started Phase I.
• Blake Road from Vernon to Pine Grove Road.
• France Avenue from West 49 1/2 Street to West 40th Street (County Project).
• New water tower.
New well.
• Renovation of West 491 /2 Street ramp.
• Vernon and Link with new traffic signal.
• Establishment of futures commission - a.k.a. Second Century project.
• Hawthorn Suites project.
• Established Southdale /Galleria E.D.D.
• Special legislation for S.E. Edina Transit System and service district.
• Establishing City -wide, weekly recycling service for single - family, duplex and
townhome residences.
• Achieving a participation and tonnage rate that compares favorable with other
cities in the Metro area and qualified Edina for maximum County funding.
• Implementations of recycling programs in all Edina schools.
• Completion of physical plant remodeling and Improvements in Police Depart-
ment.
• Re- establishment of an active crime prevention program without cost to the
City.
• Recruited and selected six (6) new quality Police Officers.
• Managed a 5.2% increase in Police calls for service.
• Acquisition of and conversion to a new Police service weapon.
• Establishment of a Narcotics Officer position.
-3-
• Increased contact with senior citizens in the area of community education and
crime prevention.
• Installation of mobile data terminals (MDT's) in the patrol fleet.
• Development of an improvement property management system.
• Computerization of animal control records.
-4-
CITY OF EDINA
SUMMARY OF STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION
Barbara Arney, Consultant
Government Training Service
March 15, 1990
SUMMARY OF STRATEGIC DIRECTION
The Futures Commission has identified two critical issues:
1. How can Edina be a regional participant without
losing its dentity?
2. What can be done to prevent the inevitable
decline of Edina?
In response to regional participation,-the consensus of the
Council was to not be proactive in regional participation,
except where non - involvement may mean direct negative impact on
the city (such as transportation issues).
In response to issue two, the Council challenged the
validity of the issue, feeling that decline was not inevitable.
Strategies to continually improve and maintain the highest
quality of service and financial strength should be pushed to
ensure "premiere city" status. Proactive, formal efforts to
"tell the, Edina story" should be dropped.
1990 - 1991 Priorities
1. Maintain Quality Services
Internal management goals addressed services. (Defining,
.reporting and monitoring quality services may need to be
addressed.)
2. Enhance Financial Strength
A "Think Tank" involving community experts will be
established to explore financial projections, alternative
revenue sources, and reduction of expenses.
3. Community Standards
Agreement needs to be reached regarding the role of the
City in code enforcement and Human Services.
4. Recycling and Garbage
5. Personnel
A plan is needed for Human Resource Development which
includes Succession Planning and Management Training.
UNEDITED LIST OF ISSUES
Question: What are the priorities for the next one to three
years related to:
1. How can Edina be a regional participant without
losing its identity?
2. What can be done to prevent the "inevitable decline
of Edina ?"
1. Selling Edina.
2. Partnership and shared services with other: Schools and
Realty; Schools and City (Chemical Dependency); Summer
Academy (Park and Recreation).
3. Need to continually challenge the system.
4. Accelerate renovation.
5. Monitor quality of goods and services.
6. Transition.
7. Code improvement and enforcement.
8. Aging population service demands.
9. Rebuild community.
10. Develop Edina Story: What is it? Why tell it? Who are we
telling it to?
11. Code (licensing and.enforcement).
12. Lobby legislature with other suburbs.
13. Exceptional service in Edina (show them, don't tell them).
14. Stronger financial.
15. Infrastructure improvements.
16. User fees.
17. Strengthen retail /commercial.
18. Actions speak for themselves.
19. Encourage youth and adults to assist aging population.
20. Award system to those re -doing homes.
21. Review financial sources /projections /strategy of local
reliance.
22. Maintain residential /commercial areas (tax incentive; senior
programs including grants to keep housing stock up).
23. Voluntary help with codes.
24. Code enforcement.
25. Edina Story: Edina gets zero
(Cost effective services; service fees; good place to
live and work; be a cheerleader; will we attract too many
people ?; changing perception; children need to understand
local government).
26. Excess housing stock in 5 -10 years.
27. How to make older people an asset.
28. Inspect rental properties.
29. Opportunity to correct building mistakes of the past.
30. Maintain quality services and infrastructure.
31. Identify and exploit information systems using data
resources vs. personal; become more efficient.
32. Regular, personal contacts with residents.
33. How to deliver services and keep infrastructure in shape.
34. Emphasize staying "home" and doing our homework.
35. Actions speak louder than words.
36. Don't believe perception of declining Edina.
37. Work with other.cities to take advantage of MIS.
38. Regional transportation.
39. Work with County and 5 municipalities in shared citizen
brainstorming committees; broaden membership.
40. Train ambassadors to tell Edina Story which includes
pre- schoolers through seniors to be available for athletic
events, fine arts, etc.
41. Shared resources.
42. Code inspection.
.i
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
From: JOHN WALLI
FINANCE DI TOR
Date: MARCH 16, 1990
Subject: AWARD OF BID -
$3,080,000 G.O. TAX
INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES
1990A
Agenda Item #
XT -A.
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
0
To Council
Action
❑
Motion
0
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Approve Resolution Relating to $3,080,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series
1990A; Awarding the Sale, Fixing the Form and Details, Providing for the
Execution and Delivery Thereof and the Security Therefor.
Info /Background
Attached.is a draft of the resolution and the Official Statement relating to
the sale of the $3,080,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1990A.
The bids will be opened, read and tabulated on Monday, March 19, 1990 at
11:00 a.m. The results of the bidding process will be presented to the City
Council for consideration at the Council Meeting at 7:00 p.m. on the same
date.
CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO
$3,080,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX
INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1990A _
Issuer: City of Edina, Minnesota
Governing Body: City Council
Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held
on March 19, 1990, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall.
Members present:
Members absent:
Documents Attached:
Minutes of said meeting (pages): 1 through 17
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $3,080,000 GENERAL
OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1990A;
AWARDING THE SALE, FIXING THE FORM AND DETAILS,
PROVIDING FOR THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF
AND THE SECURITY THEREFOR
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and
acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the
bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certifying
that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have
been carefully compared with the original records of said
corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been
transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete
transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of
said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all
resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents
approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they
relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by
the governing body at the time and place and was attended
throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and
notice of such meeting given as required by law.
WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer
this day of March, 1990.
Signature
(Seal) Marcella M. Daehn, City Clerk
Name and Title
The City Clerk presented affidavits showing
publication of the Notice of Bond Sale for the $3,080,000
General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1990A of the
City in a legal newspaper having general circulation in the
City, and in a daily or weekly periodical published in a
Minnesota city of the first class, which circulates throughout
the state and furnishes financial news as a part of its
service, as required by law. The affidavits were examined,
found to comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 475 and directed to be filed in the office of the City
Clerk.
The City Manager reported that sealed bids for
the $3,080,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series
1990A had been received prior to the time designated in the
Notice of Bond Sale for the opening of bids. Pursuant to the
Notice-of Bond Sale and the Terms and Conditions of Sale the
bids have been opened, read and tabulated, and the terms of
each have been determined to be as follows:
Name of Bidder
Total Interest
Interest Bid for Cost - Net
Rates Principal Average Rate
Member introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $3,080,000 GENERAL
OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1990A;
AWARDING THE SALE, FIXING THE FORM AND DETAILS,
PROVIDING FOR THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF
AND THE.SECURITY THEREFOR
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Edina, Minnesota (the City), as follows:
Section 1. Authorization and Sale.
1.01. .Authorization. Pursuant to the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178 and Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 475, the City Council of the City has authorized the
issuance and sale of its General Obligation Tax Increment
Bonds, Series 1990A (the Bonds) in the principal amount of
$3,080,000 for the purpose of providing funds for the payment
of public redevelopment costs to be incurred by the City and
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota
(the HRA) in connection with the 50th and France Redevelopment
Plan of the HRA (the Plan).
1.02 Sale of Bonds. Notice of the sale of the Bonds
was duly published as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section
475.60. Pursuant to the Notice of Bond Sale and the Terms and
Conditions of Sale, sealed bids for the purchase of the
Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt
of bids. The bids have been opened and publicly read and
considered, and the purchase,price, interest rates and net
interest cost under the terms of each bid have been
determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of
of ,
and associates (the Purchaser),_to purchase the Bonds at a
price of $ , plus accrued interest from-the date of
the Bonds to the date of delivery thereof, the Bonds to bear
interest at the rates set forth in Section 3.01. The proposal
is hereby accepted, and the Mayor and the City Manager are
hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on the
part of the City for the sale of the Bonds with the Purchaser.
The good faith checks of the unsuccessful bidders shall be
returned forthwith.
1.03. Performance of Requirements. All acts,
conditions and things which are required by the Constitution
and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to
happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid
issuance of the Bonds having been done, existing, having
happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for
this Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to
provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith.
Section 2. Form of Bonds.
2.01. Bond Form. The Bonds shall be prepared in
substantially the following form:
Ira
[Face of the Bonds]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF EDINA
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BOND
SERIES 1990A
No.
Date of
Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP
March 1, 1990
REGISTERED SEE REVERSE
OWNER FOR CERTAIN
DEFINITIONS
PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT DOLLARS
THE CITY OF EDINA, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the
City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and, for value
received, hereby promises to pay to the registered owner named
above, or registered assigns,'the principal amount specified
above, on the maturity date specified above, with interest
thereon from the date of original issue specified above, or the
most recent interest payment date to which interest has been
paid or duly provided for, at the annual rate specified above,
payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing
February 1, 1991, to the person in whose name this Bond is
registered at the close of business on the 15th day (whether or
not a business day) of the immediately preceding month, all
subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to
the redemption of the principal of this Bond before maturity.
The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof
at the office of the Bond Register hereafter designated, the
principal hereof, are payable in lawful money of the United
States of America by check or draft of ,
in , Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Transfer Agent
and Paying Agent (the Bond Registrar) or its successor
designated under the Resolution described herein.
mcle
Additional provisions of this Bond are contained on
the reverse hereof and such provisions shall for all purposes
have the same effect as though fully set forth hereon.
This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for
any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the
Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon'shall
have been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of
one of the authorized representatives of the Registrar.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Edina, Hennepin
County, State of Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused
this Bond to be executed by the facsimile signatures of the
Mayor and the City Manager and by a printed facsimile of the
official seal of the City and has caused this Bond to be dated
as of the date set forth below.
Dated of Authentication:
(Facsimile Signature) (Facsimile Signature)
City Manager Mayor
(Facsimile Seal)
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the
Resolution mentioned within.
as
Bond Registrar
Authorized Representative
[.Reverse of the Bonds]
This'Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal
amount of $3,080,000 (the "Bonds "), issued pursuant to a
resolution adopted by the City Council on March 19, 1990 (the
"Resolution ") to pay public redevelopment costs to be incurred
by the City and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Edina, Minnesota (the "HRA ") in accordance with a Redevelopment
Plan of the HRA (the "Plan "). The Bond is issued pursuant to
-4-
and in full conformity with the provisions of the Constitution
and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling,
including Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178 and Chapter 475. -
In addition, for the full and prompt payment of the principal
and interest on the Bonds as the same become due, the full
faith, credit and - taxing power of the City have been and are
irrevocably pledged. The Bonds are issuable only as fully
registered bonds, in denominations of $5,000 or any multiple
thereof', of single maturities.
The Bonds are each subject to redemption and
prepayment, at the option of the City in whole or in part, and
if in part, in inverse order of maturities and in $5,000
principal amounts selected by lot, within any maturity, on
February 1, 1997 and on any interest payment date thereafter,
at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed
plus interest accrued to the date of,redemption. At least
thirty days prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond,
notice of the call for redemption will be mailed to the Bond
Registrar and to the registered owner of each Bond to be
redeemed at his address appearing in the Bond Register, but no
defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption
shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of
any Bond, not affected by such defect or failure. Official
notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds
or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption
date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein
specified, and from and after such date (unless the City shall
default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or
portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial
redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered
to the registered owner without charge, representing the
remaining principal amount outstanding.
As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain
limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon
the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond
Registrar,-by the registered owner hereof in person or by his
attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof
together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to
the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or
his attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds
of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or
exchange, the -City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued
in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same
aggregate principal amount -, bearing interest at the same rate
and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any
tax, fee or governmental.charge required to be paid with
respect to such transfer or exchange.
-5-
The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the
person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute
owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the -
purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and
neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by
any notice to the contrary.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED
that all acts, conditions and things required'by the
Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to
exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the
issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding
general obligation of the City according to its terms have been
done, do exist,.have happened and have been performed in
regular and due form as so required; that prior to the issuance
hereof, the City has pledged and appropriated to a sinking fund .
established for the payment of the Bonds. tax increments to be
derived by the HRA from a tax increment district created by the
HRA to finance public redevelopment costs to be paid or
incurred by the HRA or City pursuant to the Plan, which tax
increments are to be paid by the HRA to the City in amounts
sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds
when due; that, if necessary for the payment of principal and
interest on the Bonds, ad valorem taxes are required to be
levied upon all taxable property in the City, which levy is not
limited as to rate or amount; and that the issuance of this
Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any
constitutional or statutory limitation.
The following abbreviations, when used in the
inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as
though they were written out in full - according to the
applicable laws or regulations:
TEN COM '-- as tenants UNIF TRANS MIN ACT..... Custodian.....
in common (Cust) (Minor)
TEN ENT -- as tenants
by the entireties
under Uniform Transfers to
JT TEN -- as joint tenants Minors
with right of
survivorship and Act ......................
not as tenants in (State)
common
Additional abbreviations may also be used.
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sells,
assigns and transfers unto
the within Bond and all rights thereunder,
irrevocably constitutes and appoints
and hereby
attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books kept for
registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the
premises.
Dated:
PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY
OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER
OF ASSIGNEE:
NOTICE: The signature to this
assignment must correspond with
the name as it appears upon the
face of the within Bond in every
particular, without alteration
or any change whatsoever.
Signature(s) must be guaranteed
by a commercial bank or trust
company or by a brokerage firm
having a membership in one of
the major stock exchanges.
2.02. Form of Certificate. A. certificate in
substantially the following form shall appear on the reverse
side of'each Bond, following a copy of the text of the legal
opinion of Bond Counsel:
We certify that the above is'a full, true and correct
copy of the legal opinion rendered by Bond Counsel on the issue
of Bonds of the City of Edina which includes the within Bond,
dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds.
(Facsimile signature) (Facsimile signature)
City Manager Mayor
Section 3. Bond Terms. Execution and Delivery.
3.01. Maturities. Interest Rates Denominations
Payment, and Dating of Bonds. The City shall forthwith issue
and deliver the Bonds, which shall be denominated "General
Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1990A." The Bonds shall
be issuable in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral
multiple thereof, shall mature on February 1 in.the years and
amounts set forth below, and Bonds maturing in such years and
amounts shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or
duly called for redemption at the rates per annum shown
opposite such years and amounts as follows:
-7-
Year
Amount Rate
2002
$700,000
2003
745,000
2004
800,000
2005
835,000
The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The
interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the
principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft
issued by the Registrar described herein. Each Bond shall be
dated.as of its date of initial authentication.
3.02. Interest Payment Dates. Interest on the Bonds
shall be payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year,
commencing February 1, 1991, to the owner of record thereof as
of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the
immediately preceding month, whether or•not such day is a
business day.
3.03. Registration. The City shall appoint, and
shall maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent and paying
agent (the Registrar). The effect of registration and the
rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect
thereto shall be as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its
principal corporate trust office a bond register in which
the Registrar shall provide for the registration of
ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and
exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred
or exchanged.
(b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender to the
Registrar for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the
registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written
instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the
Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or
by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in
writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in
the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one
or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and
maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar
may, however, close the books for registration of any
transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding
each interest payment date and until such interest payment
date.
IM
(c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bond is
surrendered by the registered owner for exchange, the
Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new _
Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as
requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney
duly authorized in writing.
(d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered upon any
transfer or exchange shall be promptly cancelled by the
Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the
City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond
is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar
may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that
the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of
transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur
no liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make
transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or
unauthorized.
(f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the
Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is at
any time registered in the bond register as the absolute
owner of such Bond,,whether such Bond shall be overdue or
not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account
of, the principal of and interest on such Bond and for all
other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such
registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid
and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the
City upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so
paid.
(g) Taxes Fees and Charges. For every transfer or
exchange of Bonds (except for an exchange upon a partial
redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge
upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the
Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge
required to be paid with respect to such transfer or
exchange.
(h) Mutilated. Lost. Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In
case any Bond shall become mutilated or be lost, stolen or
destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like
amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and
substitution for and upon cancellation of any such
mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any
such Bond lost, stolen or destroyed, upon the payment of
the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in
connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond lost,
-9-
stolen or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of
evidence satisfactory to it that such Bond was lost, stolen
or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon _
furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or
indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it,
in which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as
obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar shall
be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall
be given to the City. If the mutilated, lost, stolen or
destroyed Bond has already matured or been called for
redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be
necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment.
(i) Authenticating Agent. The Registrar is hereby
designated authenticating agent for the Bonds, within the
meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55,
subdivision 1.
3.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City
hereby appoints , in ,
Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City
Manager are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the
City, a contract with
as Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar
with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a
bank or trust company authorized by law.to conduct such
business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as
successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and
customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed.
The City reserves the right to remove any Registrar upon thirty
(30) days' notice and upon the appointment of a successor
Registrar, in which event the predecessor.Registrar shall
deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor
Registrar and shall deliver the bond register to the successor
Registrar. On or before each principal or interest due date,
without further order of this Council, the City Finance
Director shall transmit to the Registrar from the Bond Fund,
moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest.
then due.
3.05. Redemption. The Bonds maturing shall each be
subject to redemption and prepayment, at the option of the
City, in whole or in part, and if in part, in inverse order of
maturities and, within any maturity, in $5,000 principal
amounts selected by the Registrar by lot, on February 1, 1997
and on any interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to
the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus interest
accrued to the,date of redemption. At least thirty days prior
to the date set for redemption of any Bond, the City Finance
Director shall cause notice of the call for redemption to be
mailed to the Registrar and to the registered owner of each
-10-
Bond to be redeemed, but no defect in or failure to give such
mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of
proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such
defect or failure. The notice of redemption shall specify the
redemption date, redemption price, the numbers, interest rates
and CUSIP numbers of the Bonds to be redeemed and the place at
which the Bonds are to be surrendered for payment, which is the
principal office of the Registrar. Official notice of
redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or
portions thereof so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption
date, become due and payable at the - redemption price therein
specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall
default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or
portions thereof shall cease to bear interest'.
In addition to the notice prescribed by the preceding
paragraph, the City Finance Director shall also give, or cause
to be given, notice of the redemption of any Bond or Bonds or
portions thereof at least 35 days before the redemption date by
certified mail or telecopy to the Purchaser and all registered
securities depositories then in the business of holding
substantial amounts of obligations of the character of the
Bonds (such depositories now being The - Depository Trust
Company, of Garden City, New York; Midwest Securities Trust
Company, of Chicago, Illinois; Pacific Securities Depository'
Trust Company, of San Francisco, California; and Philadelphia
Depository Trust Company, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) and
one or more national information services that disseminate
information regarding municipal bond redemptions; provided that
any defect in or any failure to give any notice of redemption
prescribed by this paragraph shall not affect the validity of
the proceedings for the redemption of any Bond or portion
thereof.
Bonds in a denomination larger than $5,000 may be
redeemed in part in any integral multiple of $5,000. The owner
of any Bond redeemed in part shall receive, upon surrender of
such Bond to the Registrar, one or more new Bonds in authorized
denominations equal in principal amount to the unredeemed
portion of the Bond so surrendered.
3.06. Preparation and Delivery. The Bonds shall be
prepared under the direction of the City Manager and shall be
executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor
and the City Manager, and shall be sealed with the official
corporate seal of the City; provided that said signatures and
the corporate seal may be printed, engraved, or lithographed
facsimiles thereof. In case any officer whose signature, or a
facsimile of whose signature, shall appear on the Bonds shall
cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such
-11-
signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and
sufficient -for all purposes, the same as if such officer had
remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such
execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose
or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution
unless and until a.certificate of authentication on such Bond
has been duly executed by an authorized representative of the
Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds
need not be signed by the same representative. The executed
certificate of authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive
evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under
this resolution. When the Bonds have been so executed and
authenticated, they shall be delivered-by the City Manager to
the purchaser thereof upon payment of the purchase price in
accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and
executed, and the purchaser shall not be obligated to see to
the application of the purchase price.
Section 4. Security Provisions.
4.01. Construction Fund. A Construction Fund is
hereby created, as a special fund and designated on the books
of the City as the "1990A Tax Increment Bonds Construction
Fund" (the Construction Fund), to be held and administered by
the City Finance Director separate and apart from all other
funds of the City. The City hereby appropriates to the
Construction Fund all of the proceeds received from the sale of
the Bonds, less the amount to be deposited in the Bond Fund,
pursuant to Section 4.02 hereof. Moneys on hand in the
Construction Fund from time to time shall be used solely to pay
capital and administrative costs of the City and HRA in
connection with the Plan. Any amounts remaining in the
Construction Fund upon completion of the improvements to be
financed with the Bonds and payment of all of the costs thereof
shall be transferred to the Bond Fund.
4.02. Bond Fund. A Bond Fund is hereby created, as a
special fund and designated on the books of the City as the
"1990A Tax Increment Bonds Bond Fund" (the "Bond Fund "), to be
held and administered by the City Finance Director- separate and
apart from all other funds of the City. The principal of and
interest on the Bonds shall be payable from the Bond Fund. So
long as any of the Bonds or any additional bonds issued
pursuant to Section 4.04 hereof and made payable from the Bond
Fund, are outstanding and any principal.thereof or interest
thereon unpaid, the City Finance Director shall maintain the
Bond Fund, as a separate and special account to be used.for the
payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on'
the Bonds, and on all other general obligation bonds now or
hereafter issued by the City and made payable therefrom, to
-12-
finance capital and administrative costs of the HRA or City in
connection with the Plan. The City hereby irrevocably
appropriates to the Bond Fund (a) the accrued interest on the
Bonds,, (b) the tax increments derived from the Tax Increment
Financing District created pursuant to the Plan designated by
Hennepin County as No. 1200 received by the City from the HRA
to pay the-Bonds, and (c) any other moneys appropriated or
pledged by the terms of this Resolution to the Bond Fund. The
City expressly reserves the right to use amounts in the Bond
Fund (other than the amounts initially deposited therein upon
the issuance of the Bonds) to finance or pay directly capital
and administrative costs paid or incurred by the HRA or City
pursuant to the Plan.
4.03. Full Faith and Credit Pledged. The full faith
and credit and taxing power of the City shall be and are hereby
irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the
principal of and interest on the Bonds.' It is estimated that
the tax increment and other funds herein pledged for the
payment of the Bonds will be collected in amounts not less than
five percent in excess of the amounts needed to meet when due
the principal of and interest on the Bonds as required by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. Consequently, no ad
valorem taxes are now levied to pay the Bonds or the interest
to come due thereon, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.178, subdivision 2. If the money on hand in the
Bond Fund should at any time be insufficient to pay principal
and interest due on all bonds payable therefrom, such amounts
shall be paid from any other fund of the City and such other
fund shall be reimbursed therefor when sufficient moneys are
available in the Bond Fund. If on October 1 in any year the
sum of the balance in the Bond Fund plus the amount of tax
increment to be deposited therein is not sufficient to pay when
due all principal and interest to become due on all bonds
payable therefrom in the following calendar year, or the Bond
Fund has incurred a deficiency in the manner provided in this
Section 4.03, a direct, irrepealable, ad valorem tax shall be
levied on all taxable property within the corporate limits of
the City for the purpose of restoring,such accumulated or
anticipated deficiency -in accordance with the provisions of
this Resolution.
4.04. Additional Bonds. The City reserves the right
to issue additional bonds payable from the Bond Fund and tax
increments pledged thereto as may be required to finance
capital and administrative costs of other projects to be
undertaken in accordance with the Plan.
4.05. Execution of Documents. The Mayor and City
Manager are hereby authorized to execute and deliver on behalf
-13-
of the City such documents as may be appropriate to evidence
the pledge and appropriation of the tax increments by the HRA
to the City to pay the Bonds. _
Section 5. Defeasance. When any Bond has been
discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants
and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of
such Bonds shall cease, and such Bonds shall no longer be
deemed to be outstanding under'this Resolution. The City may
discharge its obligations with respect to any Bond thereto
which is due on any date by depositing with the paying agent on
or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in
full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may
nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the paying agent
a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest
accrued to the date of such deposit. The City may also
discharge its obligations with respect to any prepayable Bond
according to its terms, by depositing with the paying agent on
or before that date an amount equal to the principal, interest
and redemption premium, if any, which are then due, provided
that notice of such redemption has been duly given as provided
herein. The City may also at any time discharge its
obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the
provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating
such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank
qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or
securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited,
bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and
maturing on such dates as shall be required to pay all
principal, interest and redemption premiums to become due
thereon to maturity or said redemption date.
Section 6. County Auditor Registration, Certification
of Proceedings. Investment of Moneys Arbitrage Designation of
Bonds as Oualified Tax Exempt Obligations and Official
Statement.
6.01. County Auditor Registration. The City Manager
is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of
this resolution with the County Auditor of Hennepin County,
together with such other information as the County Auditor
shall require, and to obtain from said County Auditor a
certificate that the Bonds have been entered on his bond
register as required by law.
6.02. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of
the City and the County Auditor of Hennepin County are hereby
authorized and directed to.prepare and furnish to the purchaser
of the Bonds and to Dorsey & Whitney, Bond Counsel, certified
copies of all proceedings and records of the City, and such
WE110
other affidavits, certificates and information as may be
required to show the facts relating to the legality and
marketability of the Bonds as the same appear from the books
and records under their custody and control or as otherwise
known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and
affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed
representations of the City as to the facts recited therein.
6.03. General Tax Covenant. The City covenants and
agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it
will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers,
employees or agents any action which would cause the interest
on the Bonds to` become subject to taxation under the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and the Treasury
Regulations promulgated thereunder (the Regulations), and
covenants to take any and all actions within its powers to
ensure that the interest on the Bonds will not become subject
to taxation under the Code and the Regulations. The 'City will
cause to be filed with the Secretary of Treasury an information
reporting statement in.the form and at'the time prescribed by
the Code.
6.04. Use of Improvements. In order to ensure that
the interest on the Bonds does not become subject to taxation
under the Code, the City covenants that the improvements to be
financed with the,proceeds of the Bonds will be owned and
maintained by the City and available for use by members of the
general public on a substantially equal basis, and that the
City will not enter into any lease, use or other agreement with
any non - governmental person relating to the use of such
improvements or security for the payment of the Bonds which
might cause the'Bonds to be considered "private activity bonds"
or "private loan bonds" within the meaning of Section 141 of
the Code.
6.05. Investment of Money on Deposit in Bond Fund.
The City Finance Director shall ascertain monthly the amount on
deposit in the Bond Fund. If the amount on deposit therein
allocable to the Bonds ever exceeds the "minor portion" for the
Bonds ($100,000), such excess shall either (i) not be invested
except at a yield less than or equal to the yield of the Bonds,
computed in accordance with Section.148(h) of the Code, or (ii)
be used to purchase or to redeem Bonds. The City reserves the
right to amend the provisions of this Section 6.05 at any time,
whether prior to or after the delivery of the Bonds, if and to
the extent the City Council determines that the provisions of
this Section 6.05 are not necessary, or otherwise require
amendment, in order to ensure that the,Bonds are not arbitrage
bonds within the meaning of Section 148 of the Code and the
Regulations.
-15-
6.06. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and City
Manager, being the officers of the City charged with the
responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this
resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver
to the purchaser thereof a certificate in accordance with the
provisions of Section 148 of the Code, and Sections 1.103 -13,
1.103 -14 and 1.103 -15 of the Regulations, stating the facts,
estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue
and delivery of the Bonds which make it reasonable to expect
that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used in a manner
that would cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within the
meaning of the Code and Regulations.
6.07. Exemption from Rebate Requirement. For
purposes of complying with the requirements of Section
148(f)(4)(C) of the Code relating to the exemption of certain
small governmental units from the rebate requirements of the
Code, the City represents that:
(i) the City is a governmental unit with general taxing
powers;
(ii) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as
defined in Section 141 of the Code (Private
Activity Bonds);
(iii) ninety -five percent of the net proceeds of the
Bonds are to be used for the local governmental
purposes of the City; and
(iv) the aggregate face amount of all tax - exempt bonds
(other than Private Activity Bonds) issued by the
City in calendar year in which the Bonds are to be
issued is not reasonably expected to exceed
$5,000,000.
Section 6.08. Interest Disallowance. The City hereby
designates the Bonds as "qualified tax - exempt obligations" for
purpose of Section 265(b) of the Code relating to the
disallowance of interest expenses for financial institutions.
The City represents that in calendar year 1990 it does not
reasonably expect to issue tax - exempt obligations which are not
private activity bonds (not treating qualified 501(c)(3) bonds
under Section 145 of the Code as private activity bonds for
purposes of this representation) in an amount in excess of
$10,000,000.
6.09. Official Statement. The Official Statement,
dated as of March 7, 1990, relating to the Bonds.prepared and
distributed by Public Financial Systems, Inc., the financial
-16-
consultant for the City, is hereby approved, and the officers
of the City are authorized in connection with the delivery of
the Bonds to sign such certificates as may be necessary with
respect to the completeness and accuracy of the Official
Statement. Public Financial Systems, Inc., is hereby
authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and distribute to
the Purchaser a supplement to the Official Statement listing
the offering price, the interest rates, selling compensation,
delivery date, the underwriters and such other information
relating to the Bonds required to be included in the Official
Statement by Rule 15c2 -12 adopted by the Securities and
Exchange Commission..under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Within seven business days from the date hereof, the City shall
deliver to the Purchaser 75 copies of the Official Statement
and such supplement. The officers of the City are hereby
authorized and directed to execute such notes as may be
appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and
sufficiency.of the Official Statement.
Attest:
Adopted by the City Council on March 19, 1990.
Mayor
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing
resolution was duly seconded by Member and upon vote
being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted,
and was signed by the Mayor, whose signature was attested by
the City Clerk.
-17-
DATE:
TO:
FRAM:
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC FINANCIAL SYSTEMS
512 NICOLLET MALL. SUITE 550 • MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 5540-2
TELEPHONE: 161:1333.9177 FAX:161 21342- 2547
MEMORANDUM
March 19, 1990
City of Edina
City Council and Staff
Agenda Item XI.A.
2739 SECOND A %'E%I. -E S.E. • !'EDAR RAPIDS. IOWA 52401
TELEPHONE: 13191 363 -2221
Public Financial Systems, Inc.
Results of Bond Sale
$3,080,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1990A
The sale of the $3,080,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1990A has been very
successful. The City received nine bids for the purchase of the Bonds. We recommend that
the City accept the low bid submitted by Boatmen's National Bank of St. Louis.
There are several ways to measure the success of the bond sale. The most obvious is
market response. Nine bidding groups submitted proposals. Two other groups dropped at
the last minute. (A complete summary of the bids is attached to this memo.) In com-
parison, only four bids were received for the G.O. Refunding Bonds sold in November.
Several factors encourage the market interest. First, and foremost, is the quality of Edina as
a credit. The City's bonds are a very attractive investment. The size of the issue also
made the issue manageable for single firms or small bidding groups. The larger size of
previous issues forced potential purchasers to organize into groups. Finally, there is a
tremendous market demand for tax- exempt bonds.
The competition for the Bonds insures that the low bid offers the best available interest
rates. Closer examination shows that the City benefitted from the competitive sale process.
The low bid was almost 10 basis points lower than the next lowest bid. The remaining
eight bids were clustered in a ten basis point range.
The Bond Buyer's Index (BBI) is currently at 7.32% (see attached graphs). The BBI at the
time of the Refunding was 7.24 %. However, interest rates were lower for this sale than in
November by at least 10 basis points for each year.
We hope that you share our satisfaction with the results of the bond sale.
TABULATION OF BIDS
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
$3,080,000
G.O. TAX INCREMENT BONDS
Bidding Group
Price
Rates
INet Interest Cost
INet Interest Rate
Bid Summary
Boatmen's 6.836145%
Harris Trust 6.9326%
Blunt Ellis 6.97%
Northern Trust 6.986%
FBS /Norwest 6.9925%
Dain Bosworth 6.99988%
Piper Jaffray 7.0159%
Cronin 7.0196%
Miller Johnson 7.0323%
Bidding Group
Piper Jaffray Hopwood
Cronin & Co.
Smith, Barney
Price
$3,041,500.00
$3,033,184.00
Rates
2002
6.80
%
6.80
%
2003
6.90
%
6.90
%
2004
6.95
%
6.95
%
2005
7.00
%
7.00
Net Interest Cost
$2,915,360.42
$2,916,900.42
Net Interest Rate
7.015900
%
7.019650
Date of Sale - March 19, 1990 Page 1
TABULATION OF BIDS
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
$3,080,000
G.O. TAX INCREMENT BONDS
Bidding Group
Harris Trust & Savings. Bank
FBS Investment Services
Bear, Stearns
Norwest Investment Services
Price
Kidder, Peabody
$3,043,040.00
Price
$3,031,087.35
$3,033,184.00
Rates
2002
6.85
%
6.90
2002
6.80
%
6.80
2003
6.80
%
6.90
2004
6.80
%
6.90
Net Interest Cost
2005
6.85
%
6.90
Net Interest Cost
$2,880,767.02
%
$2,905,654.33
Net Interest Rate
6.932600
%
6.992500
Bidding Group
Dain Bosworth
Miller, Johnson & Kuehn
Merril Lynch
Price
$3,046,120.00
$3,043,040.00
Rates
2002
6.85
%
6.90
2003
6.90
%
6.90
2004
6.95
%
6.95
2005
6.95
%
7.00
Net Interest Cost
$2,908,683.54
$2,922,162.08
Net Interest Rate
6.999880
%
7.032300
Date of Sale - March 19, 1990 Page 2
TABULATION OF BIDS
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
$3,080,000
G.O. TAX INCREMENT BONDS
Bidding Group
Prudential -Bache
Blunt, Ellis & Loewi
Northern Trust
Price
Dean Witter Reynolds
$3,042,547.95
$3,044,008.00
Dropped
Rates
2002
6.80
%
6.90
2003
6.90
%
6.90
2004
6.90
%
6.90
2005
6.90
%
6.90
Net Interest Cost
$2,903,172.00
$2,896,290.38
Net Interest Rate
6.970000
%
6.986000
Bidding Group
Prudential -Bache
Clayton Brown
Shearson Lehman Hutton
Dean Witter Reynolds
Dropped
Dropped
Date of Sale - March 19, 1990 Page 3
m
m
Bond Buyer, 's Index
7.80 January 1989 To Present
7.70
7.U3
7.30
7.40
7.30
7.20
7.10
7.00
5.90
6.80
1999
1990
Week
2
U
;-a
Bond Buyer's ► ndex
1985 To Present
10.50
10.00
9.50
9.00
8.50
8.00
7.50
7.00
6.30
1983 l9 b7 1989
19 8 19 8 19 LO
Week
ti
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK NO.
DATE
078700
03/08/90
078700
03/08/90
078701
03/08/90
078701
03/08/90
THE PRINT
SHOP
078703
03/13/90
078703
03/08/90
078704
03/08/90
078705
03/08/90
078706
03/08/90
078707
03/08/90
078708
03/08/90
078708
03/08/90
078708
03/08/90
078708
03/08/90
078709
03/08/90
078710
03/08/90
078711
03/08/90
078712
03/08/90
078713
03/08/90
078714
03/08/90
078715
03/08/90
078716
03/08/90
ACCOUNT NO. IN
10- 4500- 500 -50
40- 3800 - 000 -00
10- 4212 - 510 -51
27- 4248 - 663 -66
03 -19 -90 PAGE 1
V. # P.O. # MESSAGE
90380 6312
89904.
733259
6368
2,675.00
THERMEX CORP
CHECK REGISTER
25- 4942 - 003 -29
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
71.50
THE PRINT
SHOP
PRINTING
128.00
THE PRINT
SHOP
PRINTING
199.50 *
975.00
BRUCE ESLINGER
ST. PAUL
PIONEER PRESS
(2 checks)
148.75
FURNiTURE
eAELERY
WANT ADS
130.00
FURNITURE
GALLERY
REPAIR CHAIRS
z2?8.?S
SERVICE 3/14 -3/27
30- 4201 - 781 -78
ACCOUNT NO. IN
10- 4500- 500 -50
40- 3800 - 000 -00
10- 4212 - 510 -51
27- 4248 - 663 -66
03 -19 -90 PAGE 1
V. # P.O. # MESSAGE
90380 6312
89904.
733259
6368
2,675.00
THERMEX CORP
HEATER /AC UNIT GR
25- 4942 - 003 -29
23803
5635
83.52
THERMEX CORP
GENERAL SUPPLIES
27- 4504 - 662 -66
23898
6117
2,758.52
*
975.00
BRUCE ESLINGER
4X4 POSTS
27- 4604 - 664 -66
3634
975.00
*
875.00
LINDA KOZAK
SERVICE 3/14 -3/27
30- 4201 - 781 -78
875.00
*
150.00
EDINA CHAMBER
DUES_
30- 4204 - 781 -78
150.00
*
237.50
EMPIRE HOUSE
REPAIR DOOR
28- 4248 - 702 -70
006412
5875
237.50
*
70.20
AIRSIGNAL INC
PAGER SERVICE
10- 4226 - 420 -42
12.50
AIRSIGNAL INC
PAGER SERVICE
10- 4248 - 540 -54
6.50
AIRSIGNAL INC
PAGER SERVICE
12- 4248: 434 -43
1 32.00
AIRSIGNAL INC
PAGER SERVICE
40- 4248 - 801 -80
121.20
*
35.70
MAPCO SAND /GRAVEL
CONCRETE
10- 4504- 301 -30
106043
4458
35.70
*
103.87
AUTO WSLE WEST INC
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
36374
6013
103.87
*
353.99
MARLIN IND DIV INC
TRAINING SUPPLIES•
10- 4202 - 281 -28
6357
353.99
*
45.00
DEVERNS INC
PROF SERVICES
30- 4201 - 782 -78
9433
6438
45.00
*
910.00
QUALITY FABRICATORS
DOME /REPAIR
10- 4540- 540 -54
18863
5503
910.00
*
646.04
MN PETRO SERV INC
REPAIR PARTS
10 -4540- 540 754
10070
6171
646.04
120.00
MN POLLUTION CONTROL
-SEMINAR
40- 4202 - 809 -80
120.00
*
216.00
NEW HOMES MAGAZINE
PRINTING
30- 4600 - 781 -78
ST038
6442
216.00
*
* * * -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
078717
03/08/90
22.42
COURTNEY HEYDA
SEMINAR
22.42 *
078718
03/08/90
1,101.93
NS UNIVERSAL
REFUND
1,101.93 *
078719
03/08/90
40.00
MICHEAL S MONGE
SPEAKER FEES
078719
03/09/90
40.00-
MICHEAL S MONGE
SPEAKER FEES
.00 *
078720
03/08/90
100.00
DEPT OF NATL
PERMIT FEE
100.00 *
078721
03/08/90
35.00-
ELLIOT MARSTON
SCHOOL
078721
03/08/90
35.00
ELLIOT MARSTON
SCHOOL
078721
03/08/90
35.00
ELLIOT MARSTON
SCHOOL
35.00 *
078722
03/08/90
28.00
THE FLORAL
MATERIALS
28.00 *
078723
03/08/90
60.00
MTI DIST CO
MOWING SCHOOL
60.00 *
078724
03/08/90
417.00
EDINA POLICE
CAR WASHES
417.00 *
078725
03/08/90
98.00
APRES INC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
98.00 *
078726
03/08/90
23.97
VEBEROD GEM GALLERY
COST /GOODS SOLD
23.97 *
078727
03/08/90
5.00
MUNICI -PALS
DUES
5.00 *
078728
03/08/90
229.00
THE ARTERY
COST /GOODS SOLD
229.00 *
078729
03/08/90
48.80
SILVER LAKE JACK CO
PARTS
48.80 *
078730
03/08/90
196.00
ABIGAIL BERG
AMBULANCE REFUND
196.00 *
078731
03/08/90
35.00
FESTIVALS /EVENTS
REGISTRATION
35.00
078732
03/08/90
25.00
AGNES FINE
VA PERFORMANCE
25.00
078733
03/08/90
25.00
PHYLLIS HAYWA
VA PERFORMANCE
25.00 *
078734
03/08/90
25.00
BOB CONNOLLY
VA PERFORMANCE
03 -19 -90 PAGE
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10- 4248 - 520 -52
40- 3800 - 000 -00
10- 4206 - 430 -42
10- 4206 - 430 -42
40- 4310 - 800 -80
10- 4202 - 480 -48
10- 4202 - 480 -48
10- 4202 - 480 -48
10- 4280 - 504 -50 523169 6377
10- 4202-640 -64 6270
10- 4296 - 560 -56
23- 4504 - 611 -61 006506 6231
23- 4624 - 613 -61 939542 5904
10- 3800 - 000 -00
23- 4624 - 613 -61 6631 6154
10- 4248 - 560 -56 3945, 5305
10- 3180 - 000 -00
30- 4204 - 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
2
1990 CITY OF EDINA
CHECK NO. DATE
078735
078736
078737
078738
078739
078740
078741
078742
078743
078744
078745
078746
078747
078748
078749
078750
078751
078752
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
03/08/90
I
II
03 -19 -90 PAGE
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
30- 4224- 781 -78
30- 4224- 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 42214- 781 -78
30- 4224- 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 3501 - 000 -00
30- 3501 - 000 -00
40- 4202 - 809 -80
40- 4202 - 809 -80
28- 4224 - 701 -70
28- 3500 - 000 -00
10- 4156 - 510 -51
28- 3500 - 000 -00
28- 3500 - 000 -00
27- 4248 - 667 -66 40402 6467
27- 4516- 667 -66 03007 6466
3
CHECK REGISTER
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
25.00
25.00
MARGARET GUST
VA PERFORMANCE
25.00
*
25.00
AGNES FINE
VA PERFORMANCE
25.00
*
25.00
MARIAN ALSTAD
VA PERFORMANCE
25.00
*
50.00
JOHN THOMAS
VA PERFORMANCE
50.00
*
50.00
MARILYN HALL
VA PERFORMANCE
50.00
*
25.00
PHYLLIS HAYWA
VA PERFORMANCE
25.00
*
25.00
BOB CONNOLLY
VA PERFORMANCE
25.00
100.00
PAT GREER
EXHIBIT FEE /FEB
100.00
*
120.00
MIMI DELANEY
ARTIST COMM /FEB
120.00
*
540.00
NCS AWWA
SCHOOL
540.00
*
120.00
MN POLLUTION
SEMINAR
120.00
*
7,926.63
D.EDE HENSEL
PRO SERVICE
7,926.63
*
41.00
JULIE HEINMILLER -
REFUND
41.00
MARK SCHEUNEMAN
3,511.20
MEKE SCHEUNEMAN
INSURANCE
3,511.20
*
32.00
MARTHA SCUDDER
REFUND
32.00
*
32.00
ELIZABETH CERF
REFUND
32.00
*
200.00
BLOOMINGTON HTG &
REPAIRS
200.00
*
150.00
OLM EQUIPMENT
DESK
150.00
*
I
II
03 -19 -90 PAGE
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
30- 4224- 781 -78
30- 4224- 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 42214- 781 -78
30- 4224- 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 3501 - 000 -00
30- 3501 - 000 -00
40- 4202 - 809 -80
40- 4202 - 809 -80
28- 4224 - 701 -70
28- 3500 - 000 -00
10- 4156 - 510 -51
28- 3500 - 000 -00
28- 3500 - 000 -00
27- 4248 - 667 -66 40402 6467
27- 4516- 667 -66 03007 6466
3
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK NO.
DATE
078753
03/08/90
$1 * ** **
ITEM DESCRIPTION
078755
03/09/90
078756
03/09/90
078757
03/09/90
078758
03/09/90
078759
03/09/90
* * * * **
SERVICES
078761
03/09/90
078762
03/12/90
078763
03/12/90
078763
03/12/90
078763
03/12/90
078763
03/12/90
078763
03/12/90
078764
03/12/90
078765
03/12/90
078766
03/12/90
078767
03/12/90
078768
03/12/90
078768
03/13/90
078768
03/12/90
* * * * **
078770
03/12/90
03 -19 -90 PAGE 4
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10- 4540 - 646 -64 6334
30- 4201 - 781 -78
30- 3505 - 000 -00
10- 4504- 200 -20
10- 4206 - 140 -14
10- 4248 - 301 -30 3992
10- 4202 - 260 726
50 -1300- 003 -00 6525
10- 4202 - 120 -12 659
10- 4202 - 120 -12 691
10- 4202 - 240 -24
10- 4202 - 240 -24 652
10- 4202 - 600 -60
10- 3072 - 000 -00
10 -1145- 000 -00
30- 4208 - 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 4201 - 782 -78 6536
30- 4504 - 782 -78 6584
30- 4504- 782 -78 320940 6085
10- 4204 - 600 -60
* ** -CKS
*. ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
CHECK
REGISTER
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
102.00
EINAR JOHANSEN
GLASS
102.00
*
1,230.00
LIZ GEREBI
SERVICES
1,230.00
*
87.50
NW TENNIS ASSO
REIMBURSEMENT
87.50
*
15.88
CRICKET'
FILM PROCESSING
15.88
*
39.00
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
MONTHLY MEETING
39.00
*
500.00
ABCO PORT SANDBLAST
SANDBLAST
500.00
*
69.00
MN ASPHALT
REGISTRATION
69.00
*
118.00
SIGN -TIFIC
SIGNAGE
118.00
*
70.00
SAY IT ONCE SYST
INC
VENTURA INSTR
35.00
SAY IT ONCE SYST
INC
VENTURA INSTR
30'.00
SAY IT ONCE SYST
INC
VENTURA INSTR
70.00
SAY IT ONCE SYST
INC
VENTURA INSTR
106.00
SAY IT ONCE SYST
INC
VENTURA INSTR
311.00
*
10.00
PLITT N CENTRAL
REFUND
10.00
96,390.00
HARRIS BANK
BOND INTEREST
96,390.00
126.00
DALE LUNDGREN
MILEAGE
126.00
30.00
GOLDEN VALLEY
SERVICE 4 -10 -90
30.00
450.00
HARMON CONTRACT
PRO SERVICES
120.00
HARMON CONTRACT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,144.00
HARMON CONTRACT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,714.00
25.00
US TENNIS ASSO
DUES
03 -19 -90 PAGE 4
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10- 4540 - 646 -64 6334
30- 4201 - 781 -78
30- 3505 - 000 -00
10- 4504- 200 -20
10- 4206 - 140 -14
10- 4248 - 301 -30 3992
10- 4202 - 260 726
50 -1300- 003 -00 6525
10- 4202 - 120 -12 659
10- 4202 - 120 -12 691
10- 4202 - 240 -24
10- 4202 - 240 -24 652
10- 4202 - 600 -60
10- 3072 - 000 -00
10 -1145- 000 -00
30- 4208 - 781 -78
30- 4224 - 781 -78
30- 4201 - 782 -78 6536
30- 4504 - 782 -78 6584
30- 4504- 782 -78 320940 6085
10- 4204 - 600 -60
* ** -CKS
*. ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY OF EDINA
CHECK NO. DATE
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
AMOUNT
25.00 *
8,882.50
8,882.50 *
104,610.10
104,610.10 *
151.37
151.37 *
169.98
169.98 *
20.00
20.00 *
18.69
18.69 *
23.50
23.50 *
265.60
a 265.60 *
290.00
290.00
290.00
870.00 *
34.71
34.71 *
345.00
480.00
825.00 *
180.00
180.00 *
141.50
141.50 *
135.00
135.00 *
338.35
rm 338.35 *
452.88
452.88 *
43.76
33.28
CHECK REGISTER
VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION
PITT DES MOINES
PROGRESIVE
ABP MIDWEST INC
BEST BUY CO
MN ANIMAL
CSC CREDIT SER INC
SOUTHDALE PET HOSP
MPLS HEALTH DEPT
GOVT TRAIN SERV
GOVT TRAIN SERV
GOVT TRAIN SERV
PRENTICE HALL
JLF VIDEO PROD
JLF VIDEO ,PROD
LMC HOUSING BUREAU
CRAGUNS
GTS
DEF TEC CORP
STANDARD FUSEE CORP
BRIGADE
BRIGADE
PAYMENT
PAYMENT
STRAT PLANNING
13" COLOR TV
GENERAL SUPPLIES
PRO SERV
PRO SERVICES
PRO SERVICES
CONT ED
CONT ED
CONT ED
BOOKS /PAMPHLETS
VIDEO PROD
VIDEO PROD
LODGING LMC CONF
LODGING MCMA CONF
REGISTRATION
AMMUNITION
SAFETY EQUIP
UNIFORMS
UNIFORMS
03 -19 -90 PAGE 5
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
60- 2040 - 000 -00
60- 2040 - 000 -00
10- 4206 - 100 -10
531142 6582
10- 4901 - 420 -42
10- 4504 - 470 -47
10- 4201 - 420 -42
10- 4201 - 470 -47
10- 4201 - 420 -42
10- 4202 - 420 -42
7037
10- 4202 - 420 -42
7040
10- 4202 - 420 -42
7039
10- 4502 - 420 -42
12- 4201 - 434 -43
6904
12- 4201 - 434 -43
6905
12- 4202 - 434 -43
12- 4202 - 434 -43
12- 4202 - 434 -43
10- 4572 - 420 -42
15608 5521
10- 4642- 420 -42
6082
10- 4266 - 420 -42
4901
10- 4266 - 420 -42
4901
1990 CITY OF EDINA
CHECK NO. DATE
078788
078788
078788
078788.
078788
078788
078788
078789
078790
078790
078790
078790
078790
078791
078792
078793
078794
078795
078796
078797
078798
078798
078799
078800
078801
078802
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
03/13/90
AMOUNT
77.04
30.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00-
16.06
8.00
62.06 *
10,165.56
10,165.56 *
24.50
17.18
32.19
71.74
18.00
163.61 *
90.00
90.00 *
126.00
126.00 *
90.00
90.00 *
90.00
90.00 *
225.00
225.00 *
8,616.53
8,616.53 *
10,796.75
10,796.75 *
4,294.00
4,979.00
9,273.00 *
70.00
70.00 *
345.00
345.00 *
175.00
175.00 *
245.00
CHECK REGISTER
VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION
DIANE SANKEY
DIANE SANKEY
DIANE SANKEY
DIANE SANKEY
DIANE SANKEY
DIANE SANKEY
DIANE SANKEY
HOISINGTON GROUP INC
NAOMI JOHNSON
NAOMI JOHNSON
NAOMI JOHNSON
NAOMI JOHNSON
NAOMI JOHNSON
GWEN LEOPOLDT
TOBIE DICKER
KATHY GUSTAFSON
PHYLLIS PETERSON
BOB CONNOLLY
W H CATES CONSTR
LAYNE MINNESOTA CO
COMPUTERS PLUS
COMPUTERS PLUS
HTC EXTENSION
JP FOOD SERV
GOHPER HEATING &
SAFETY SYSTEM INC
SWEEPER CLINIC
PARKING
TECH SPEC MANUAL
TECH SOEC MANUAL
TECH SOEC MANUAL
PARTS
UNLEADED GAS
TIF PLANNING
OFFICE ADM
GENERAL SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
CRAFT SUPPLIES
PRINTING
AC INSTRUCTOR
AC INSTRUCTOR
AC INSTRUCTOR
AC INSTRUCTOR
AC INSTRUCTOR
CONSTRUCTION
PAYMENT
ENG EQUIPMENT
COMPUTER
SCHOOL
GENERAL SUPPLIES
REPAIR
SCHOOL
03 -19 -90 PAGE 6
ACCOUNT NO..INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10- 4202 - 281 -28
10- 4504 - 482 -48
10- 4504 - 560 -56
10- 4504 - 560 -56
10- 4504 - 560 -56
10- 4540 - 560 -56
10- 4808 - 648 -64
10- 4201 - 500 -50
23- 4120 - 611 -61
23- 4504 - 613 -61
23- 4516 - 611 -61
23- 4588 - 611 -61
23- 4600 - 611 -61
23- 4201 - 611 -61
23- 4201 - 611 -61
23- 4201 - 611 -61
23- 4201 - 611 -61
23- 4201 - 611 -61
60- 1300 - 015 -20
60- 2040 - 000 -00
25- 4900 - 001 -26 12303 5649
25- 4900 - 001 -26 12304 5789
10- 4202 - 640 -64
27- 4504- 667 -66 899718 6216
27- 4248 - 662 -66 1570 6587
10- 4202 - 440 -44
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
VENDOR
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
THOMAS JENSON
SUPPLIES
245.00 *
078803
03/13/90
85.00
COUNTS MED EQUIP
AMB SUPPLIES
85.00 *
078804
03/13/90
10.56
CUTTING
CHAIN
10.56 *
078805
•03/13/90
82.00
"
82.00 *
078806
03/13/90
17.81
078806
03/13/90
145.16
078806
03/13/90
370.95
533.92 *
078807
03/13/90
135.00
135.00 *
078A06
03/08/90
68.00
I. 68.00
078A07
03/12/90
66.00
078A07
03/12/90
54.00
120.00
It tY *fl ft 11
078A17
03/08/90
400.15
400.15
* * * * **
078A29
03/08/90
292.43
078A29
03/08/90
23.40
078A29
03/08/90
27.30
078A29
03/13/90
275.73
-
618.86
* * * * **
078A39
03/08/90
5.92
078A39
03/08/90
73.01
078A39
03/08/90
96.39 -
078A39
03/08/90
96.39
078A39
03/08/90
96.36
* * * * **
175.29 *
078A45
03/13/90
196.45
196.45 *
* * * * **
CHECK REGISTER
REBUILD
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
SW TECH COLLEGE
SCHOOL
THOMAS JENSON
SUPPLIES
TERRANCE KEHOE
MEETING EXP
COUNTS MED EQUIP
AMB SUPPLIES
COUNTS MED EQUIP
AMB SUPPLIES
COUNTS MED EQUIP
AMB SUPPLIES
LEROY LISK
CLEANING SUPPLIES
A -1 ROOTMASTER REPAIR PLUMBING
ALL -AMER BOTTLING MIX
ALL -AMER BOTTLING MIX
ADS TO GO SIGNAGE
ALBINSON SUPPLIES
ALBINSON PRINTS
ALBINSON PRINTS
ALBINSON BLUE PRINT PAPER
ALTERNATOR
REBUILD
BALLAST
10- 4540 - 560 -56
ALTERNATOR
REBUILD
MOTOR
1750
ALTERNATOR
REBUILD
CUTTING
CHAIN
ALTERNATOR
REBUILD
CUTTING
CHAIN
ALTERNATOR
REBUILD
CUTTING
CHAIN
AMER. PHOTO
COPY
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
03 -19 -90 PAGE 7
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10- 4202- 440 -44
10- 42,06- 440 -44
10- 4206 - 440 -44
10- 4510 - 440 -44 106964 5804
10- 4510 - 440 -44 106023 5418
10- 4510 - 440 -44 104030 5420
10- 4512 - 440 -44
28- 4248 - 702 -70 74268 6088
50- 4632 - 842 -84
50- 4632 - 862 -86
50- 1300 - 003 -00 EDA023 6369
10- 4504 - 260 -26 628536 5352
10- 4570 - 260 -26 627212 5352
10- 4570 - 260 -26 627261 5352
10- 4570 - 260 -26 630324 5352
10- 4540 - 540 -54
1755
6196
10- 4540 - 560 -56
1754
6183
10- 4580 - 301 -30
1750
5669
10- 4580 - 301 -30
1750
5669
10- 4580 - 301 -30
1750
5669
10- 4504 - 420 -42 6421
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
1,624.38-
AKZO
CHECK REGISTER
INC
03 -19 -90 PAGE 8
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
078A49
03/08/90
203.07
AMERICAN
LINEN
LAUNDRY
10- 4262 - 440 -44
078A49
.03/08/90
10.58
AMERICAN
LINEN
LAUNDRY
10- 4262- 482 -48
078A49
03/08/90
107.27
AMERICAN
LINEN
LAUNDRY
10- 4262 - 520 -52
078A49
03/08/90
176.90
AMERICAN
LINEN
LAUNDRY
30- 4262- 782 -78
078A49
03/08/90
64.55
AMERICAN
LINEN
LAUNDRY
50- 4262 - 821 -82
078A49
03/08/90
73.99
AMERICAN
LINEN
LAUNDRY
50- 4262 - 841 -84
078A49
03/08/90
70.03
AMERICAN
LINEN
LAUNDRY
50- 4262 - 861 -86
SALT
10- 4538 - 318 -30
706.39
2756
078B05
03/13/90
3,197.87 *
* * * * ** * ** -CKS
078A54 03/08/90 35.00 AAGARD RECYCLING 50- 4250 - 821 -82-
078A54 03/08/90 35.00 AAGARD RECYCLING 50- 4250 - 841 -84
078A54 03/08/90 35.00 AAGARD RECYCLING 50- 4250 - 861 -86
105.00 *
* * * * ** * ** -CKS
078A59
03/12/90
1,624.38-
AKZO
SALT
INC
ROAD
SALT
10- 4538- 318 -30
128777
2756
078A59
03/12/90
1,624.38
AKZO
SALT
INC
RAOD
SALT
10 -4538- 318 -30
128777
2756
07BA59
03/12/90
1,624.38-
AKZO
SALT
INC
ROAD
SALT
10- 4538- 318 -30
128777
2756
078A59
03/12/90
1,624.38
AKZO
SALT
INC
ROAD
SALT
10- 4538 - 318 -30
128777
2756
078A59
03/12/90
1,624.38
AKZO
SALT
INC
RAOD
SALT
10- 4538 - 318 -30
128777
2756
078A59
03/12/90
1,573.49
AKZO
SALT
INC
ROAD
SALT
10- 4538 - 318 -30
128787
2756
078B05
03/13/90
3,197.87 *
BACH -BILL
OFFICE SUPPLIES
30- 4516 - 781 -78
149.36
* * * * **
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078807
03/08/90
37.00
* ** -CKS
078A80
03/08/90
473.24
ASTLEFORD
INTL
DOOR /TRUCK
10- 4540 - 560 -56
61810
6116
473.24 *
* * * * ** * ** -CKS
078A95
03/13/90
31.70
LYLE AXT
CONCESSIONS
29- 4624 - 722 -72
078A95
03/12/90
30.24
LYLE AXT
CONCESSIONS
29- 4624- 722 -72
61.94
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078B03
03/08/90
40.81
BENSON
SAFETY GLASSES
10- 4262 - 646 -64 278893 6103
078603
03/08/90
53.00
BENSON
SAFETY GLASSSES
10- 4642- 301 -30 276322 9407
93.81
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078B05
03/13/90
50.00
BACH -BILL
POSTAGE
30- 4290 - 781 -78
078B05
03/13/90
19.73
BACH -BILL
RECEPTION SUP
30- 4504- 781 -78
078605
03/13/90
54.63
BACH -BILL
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30- 4504 - 782 -78
078B05
03/13/90
25.00
BACH -BILL
OFFICE SUPPLIES
30- 4516 - 781 -78
149.36
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078807
03/08/90
37.00
BADGER METER INC
METER FREIGHT
40- 1220 - 000 -00 617388 6353
1990 CITY OF EDINA
CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT
37.00
* * * * **
078B17
03/12/90
33,348.15
078B17
03/12/90
182.40
078B22
03/08/90
33,530.55 *
078B18
03/08/90
337.32
078B18
03/08/90
64.46
078830
03/08/90
401.78 *
* * * * **
078822
03/08/90
193.00
078622
03/08/90
371.10
078B22
03/08/90
556.10
078B22
03/08/90
1,339.05
078B22
03/09/90
1,518.45
078830
03/08/90
3,977.70
* * * * **
03/08/90
I
078824
03/08/90
•'
220.52
078B30
03/13/90
4 220.52
078B25
03/08/90
100.00
078830
03/08/90
100.00
078B27 03/08/90 124.00
078627 03/08/90 234.50
078827 03/08/90 163.00
521.50
* * * * **
078B30
03/12/90
12.00
078B30
03/08/90
327.74
078830
03/08/90
29.40
078830
03/12/90
793.93
078830
03/08/90
10.49
078830
03/08/90
23.92
078B30
03/08/90
20.40
078B30
03/08/90
23.96
078B30
03/13/90
40.00
078830
03/12/90
2.52
078830
03/08/90
3.16
078830
03/08/90
12.52
BERTELSON
BROS.
1,300.04
* * * * **
BERTELSON
BROS:
078B32
03/08/90
42.20
CHECK REGISTER
VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION
BFI RECYCLING SYS RECYCLING CONTRACT
BFI RECYCLING SYS RECYCLING CONTRACT
BATTERY WAREHOUSE REPAIR PARTS
BATTERY WAREHOUSE CABLES
BEER
WHOLESALERS
BEER
BEER
WHOLESALERS
BEER
BEER
WHOLESALERS
BEER
BEER
WHOLESALERS
BEER
BEER
WHOLESALERS
BEER
BLEVENS CONS SUPPLY COST OF GOODS
BENNETT -WAYNE POLICE SERVICES
BERGFORD TRUCKING LIQUOR DELIVERY
BERGFORD TRUCKING LIQUOR DELIVERY
BERGFORD TRUCKING LIQUOR DELIVERY
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
MARKERS
BERTELSON
BROS..
INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
LIQUID PAPER
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
PENS /LABELS
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
MAN ENVELOPES
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
STAMP
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
CAARD TRAY
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
DISK FILE /LEAD
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
OFFICE SUPPLIES
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
STAMP PAD
BERTELSON
BROS:
INC.
INK ROLLER
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
HIGHLIGHTERS
BEST LOCK OF MPLS DOOR REPAIR
03 -19 -90 PAGE 9
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
* ** -CKS
10- 4226- 507 -50
10- 4226 - 507 -50
10- 4540 - 560 -56 993 5862
10- 4620- 560 -56 51 6324
27- 4630 - 663 -66
27- 4630 - 667 -66
50- 4630 - 822 -82
50- 4630 - 842 -84
50- 4630 - 862 -86
28- 4624 - 703 -70 6363
10- 4100 - 430 -42
50-4626- 822 -82
50- 4626- 842 -84
50- 4626 - 862 -86
10- 4504 - 301 -30 550332
10- 4504 -510- 51-547838
10- 4504- 510 -51 545764
10- 4504 - 510 -51 550257
10- 4504 - 510 -51 547838
10- 4504 - 540 -54 541666 5871
10- 4504- 560 -56 541938 5842
10- 4504 - 600 -60 545764
10- 4516- 440 -44 546384 5807
23- 4516 - 611 -61 550332
28- 4516- 701 -70 547838
40- 4504 - 800 -80 547838
27- 4248 - 667 -66 1920 6471
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
03 -19 -90 PAGE 10
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O.
# MESSAGE
078B32
03/08/90
12.60
BEST LOCK OF MPLS
NEW KEYS
27- 4540 - 667 -66
1919
6470
078B32
03/08/90
58.84
BEST LOCK OF MPLS
REPAIR PARTS
27- 4540- 667 -66
707
6469
113.64
"
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078846
03/08/90
49.05
BLMGT LINO /CARPET
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 520 -52
9727
5944
49.05
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078B48
03/09/90_
55.00
BLMGT LOCK SAFE
GENERAL-SUPPLIES
30- 4504 - 782 -78
48236
6465
55.00
.&
* * * * **
** *-CKS
078B59
03/08/90
417.86
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
10- 4250 - 301 -30
078859
03/08/90
156.70
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
10- 4250 - 440 -44
078B59
03/08/90
156.70
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
10- 4250 - 520 -52
078B59
03/08/90
417.85
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
10- 4250 - 540 -54
078859
03/08/90
60.72
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
23- 4250 - 612 -61
078859
03/08/90
156.70
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
27- 4250 - 662 -66
078859
03/08/90
12.06
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
27- 4250 - 664 -66
078859
03/08/90
820.88
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
27- 4250 - 667 -66
078859
03/08/90
466.03
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
28- 4250 - 702 -70
078B59
03/08/90
1,321.41
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
30- 4250 - 782 -78
078859
03/08/90
26.12
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
50- 4250 - 841 -84
078859
03/08/90
26.12
BFI OF MN INC
GARBAGE
50- 4250 - 861 -86
4,039.15
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078877
03/13/90
11,794.10
BRAUN ENG TESTNG INC
CONSTRUCTION
27- 1300 - 003 -00
254
11,794.10
* ** -CKS
078B81
03/13/90
3,406.38
BRW INC.
PRO ENG SERV
60- 1300 - 290 -04
57152
3,406.38
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078C01
03/08/90
28.62
C & S DISTRIBUTING
COST /GOODS.SOLD
23- 4624 - 613 -61
100279
5777
078C01
03/08/90
58.68
C & S DISTRIBUTING
COST /GOODS SOLD
23- 4624 - 613 -61
100211
5777
078C01
03/09/90
70.41
C & S DISTRIBUTING
COST /GOODS SOLD
23- 4624 - 613 -61
101659
6233
078C01
03/08/90
122.65
C & S DISTRIBUTING
COST /GOODS SOLD
23- 4624 - 613 -61
101258
6152
280.36
* * * * **
. * ** -CKS
078C08
03/08/90
862.90
VERMEER
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540- 560 -56
P63342
5853
•862.90
* * * * **
-
* ** -CKS
07 8C25
03/12/90
79.80
CHAPIN PUBLISHING CO
AD FOR BIDS
10- 4210 - 140 -14
109831
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
078C25
03/08/90
49.90
CHAPIN PUBLISHING CO
ADVERTISING
129.70 *
k k k k k k
078C28
03/13/90
85.94
CHEMSEARCH
CLEANER
85.94 *
kkkkkk
078C30
03/09/90
121.90
CITY BEER
BEER
078C30
03/09/90
76.50
CITY BEER
BEER
198.40.*
078C32
03/08/90
110.67
FRAN CALLAHAN
MILEAGE /FEB
110.67 *
078C33
03/08/90
27.10
CITY OF EDINA
WATER
27.10 *
kkkkkk
078C36
03/08/90
12.25
CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV
WINDOW CLEANING
078C36
03/08/90
12.25
CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV
WINDOW CLEANING
078C36
03/08/90
12.25
CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV
WINDOW CLEANING
36.75 *
078C37
03/08/90
11.56
CLANCY DRUG INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
11.56
kkkkk k
078C44
03/08/90
660.50
COCA COLA BOTTLING
COST OF GOODS
078C44
03/08/90
161.50
COCA COLA BOTTLING
COST OF GOODS
078C44
03/08/90
161.50-
COCA COLA BOTTLING
COST OF GOODS
078C44
03/08/90
203.17
COCA COLA BOTTLING
MIX
078C44
03/08/90
482.79
COCA COLA BOTTLING
MIX
078C44
03/08/90
446.21
COCA COLA BOTTLING
MIX
1,792.67
kkkkk k
078C51
03/08/90
633.60
COMM OF REVENUE
FUEL TAX
633.60 *
kkkkk k
078C60
03/08/90
73.86
CONSTR FASTENING SYS
CLIP ASSM
73.86 *
*kkkkk
078C64
03/12/90
36.87
SYSCO MINNESOTA
FOOD
03 -19 -90 PAGE 11
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
30- 4214 - 781 -78 109638 6433
10- 4512 - 440 -44 5801
50- 4630 - 822 -82
50- 4630 - 862 -86
10- 4208 - 480 -48
10- 4258 - 646 -64
50- 4248 - 821 -82 8042
50- 4248 - 841 -84 8043
50- 4248 - 861 -86 8044
10- 4504 - 260 -26
28- 4624- 703 -70
28- 4624 - 703 -70
28- 4624 - 703 -70
50- 4632- 822 -82
50- 4632 - 842 -84
50- 4632 - 862 -86
10- 4612- 560 -56
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
1074580 - 301 -30 13439 6002
* ** -CKS
27- 4504- 663 -66 5510
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
27- 4624 - 662 -66
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
078C64
03/12/90
217.60
SYSCO MINNESOTA
CLEANING SUPPLIES
078C64
03/12/90
538.43
SYSCO MINNESOTA
SUPPLIES
40- 4504 - 803 -80
2555
792.90 *
078C65
03/08/90
120.00
CONTACT MOBILE COMM
BATTERY
120.00 *
* * * * **
23- 4588 - 611 -61
82857
5775
078C89
03/08/90
68.84
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
CUSHMAN PARTS
078C89
03/08/90
45.45
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
REPAIR PARTS
078C89
03/08/90
25.40-
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
CREDIT
078C89
03/08/90
26.60
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO:
BEARINGS
078C89
03/08/90
123.75
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
REPAIR PARTS
239.24
* * * * **
078D07
03/08/90
34.43
D.C. HEY CO.
SERVICE
34.43
* * * * **
078D27
03/13/90
57.87
DAVE S FOOD WAGON
MILK
57.87 *
* * * * **
078D29
03/08/90
245.25
DAVIDSEN DIST. INC.
BEER
245.25 *
* * * * **
078D31
03/08/90
240.80
DAVIES WATER EQUIP
GENERAL SUPPLIES
240.80
*1tA M1t*
078D61
03/08/90
100.00
DICK NISSEN
POLICE SERVICES
100.00
* * * * **
078D85
03/08/90
58.96
DUFFEY PAPER CO.
CRAFTS SUPPLIES
58.96
* * * * **
078D88
03/08/90
492.00
DUO CHEM
NO RUST
078D88
03/08/90
164.12
DUO CHEM
CLEANING SUPPLIES
656.12
* * * * **
078E17
03/08/90
3,825.00
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
BEER
ACCOUNT NO. IN
27- 4512 - 663 -66
27- 4624 - 663 -66
10- 4294 - 560 -56
27- 4540 - 664 -66
27- 4540- 664 -66
27- 4540 - 664 -66
27- 4540 - 664 -66
27- 4540 - 664 -66
30- 4288 - 781 -78
03 -19 -90 PAGE 12
V. # P.O. # MESSAGE
5510
5510
14430 5989
* ** -CKS
42311 6310
42117 6053
42335 6310
42336 6310
42109 6040
* ** -CKS
157275 6432
* ** -CKS
27- 4624 - 662 -66
5508
* ** -CKS
50- 4630 - 842 -84
* ** -CKS
40- 4504 - 803 -80
2555
6027
* ** -CKS
10- 4100 - 430 -42
* ** -CKS
23- 4588 - 611 -61
82857
5775
* ** -CKS
10- 4504 - 540 -54
6063
5686
10- 4504 - 646 -64
2077
6126
* ** -CKS
50- 4630 - 822 -82
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
03 -19 -90 PAGE 13
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR.
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O.
# MESSAGE
078E17
03/08/90
5,373.00
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
BEER
50- 4630- 842 -84
078E17
03/08/90
4,259.85
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
BEER
50- 4630 - 862 -86
13,457.85
*kkkkk
-
* ** -CKS
078F11
03/08/90
20.00
FEED RITE CONTROL
DEMURRAGE CHG
40- 4622 - 805 -80
74954
6416
20.00
kkkkk k
kkk -CKS
078F26
03/08/90
307.00
FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540- 810 -80
3479
5940
307.00
kkkkkk
*** -CKS
078 ;29
03/08/90
14,083.41
FLO- COVERY SYSTEMS
REPAIRS
40- 424,8- 805 -80
3047
5766
14,083.41
kkkkk k
* ** -CKS
078G01
03/08/90
522.16
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
10- 4262 - 301 -30
078G01
03/08/90
276.40
G -& K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
10- 4262 - 560 -56
078G01
03/08/90
308.38
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
10- 4262- 646 -64
078G01
03/08/90
A 249.76
G & K SERVICES
CLEANING SUPPLIES
10- 4512 - 540 -54
078G01
03/08/90
87.76
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
28- 4262 - 702 -70
078G01
03/08/90
16.08
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
30- 4262 - 782 -78
078G01
03/08/90
344.30
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
40- 4262 - 801 -80
1,804.84
-
*kk -CKS
078G15
03/13/90
28.00
GEM TAP SERV
BEER LINES CLEAN
27- 4630 - 662 -66
5509
28.00
kkkkk k
* ** -CKS
078G24
03/13/90
54.60
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
RADIO SERV
10- 4248 - 440 -44
61942
5051
078G24
03/13/90
27.30
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
RADIO SERV
10- 4248 - 440 -44
61438
5051
078G24
03/13/90
95.20
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
RADIO SERV
10 -4248- 440 -44
62711
5051
078G24
03/13/90
43.60
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
RADIO SERV
10- 4248 - 440 -44
61439
5051
078G24
03/08/90
111.30
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
RADIO REPAIR
10- 4294 - 560 -56
61673
332.00
kkkkkk
* ** -CKS
078G32
03/12/90
71.25
GOPHER STATE 1 CALL
GOHPER 1 CALL
10- 4318 - 280 -28
078G32
03/12/90
71.25
GOPHER STATE 1 CALL-
GOHPER 1 CALL
40- 4504 - 801 -80
290166
142.50
.
kkkkk•
�
kkk -CKS
078G38
03/08/90
100.00
GEORGE BUTLER
POLICE SERVICES
10- 4100 - 430 -42
100.00
kkkkk k
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
10- 4504 - 560 -56
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
078G42
03/09/90
302.12
078G42
03/09/90
127.00
27- 1300 - 005 -00
159171
429.12 *
* * * * **
TEST KIT
10- 4504 - 482 -48
078G44
03/08/90
50.00
AMB SUPPLIES
10- 4510 - 440 -44
50.00 *
* * * * **
H.L. MOORE
FORCEPS
078G57
03/08/90
212.00
* * * * **
AIRWAYS
212.00
078G68
03/08/90
60.80
078G68
03/13/90
5,108.40 °,� —iss.eo-
6246
5,169.20 *tea"
078H04
03/13/90
51.03
-
51.03
078H05
03/13/90
301.90
078H05
03/13/90
17.40
078H05
03/13/90
56.00
375.30
* * * * **
078H09
03/08/90
189.40
189.40
* * * * **
078H21
03/08/90
216.76
ne ec *
216.76 *�
078H22
03/08/90
100.00
100.00
078H33
03/13/90
870.98 -
078H33
03/13/90
870.98
078H33
03/13/90
870.98
078H33
03/13/90
4.50
875.48
078H34
03/12/90
67.92
078H34
03/12/90
67.92 -
078H34
03/12/90
67.92
CHECK REGISTER
VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION
GIL HEBARD GUNS AMMO
GIL HEBARD GUNS TARGETS
GLEN SIPE PIANO SERV SERVICE CONTRACT
03 -19 -90 PAGE 14
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
29- 4572 - 722 -72 18634 -6049
29- 4648 - 722 -72 18635 6050
30- 4288 - 782 -78 900228 6434
GOPHER OIL CO.
FLOOR HI DRI
10- 4504 - 560 -56
393987
6007
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO.
ELECTRICAL PARTS
10- 4540 - 646 -64
468177
5995
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO.
LIGHTING
27- 1300 - 005 -00
159171
5032
HACH CO.
TEST KIT
10- 4504 - 482 -48
219115
6213
H.L. MOORE
AMB SUPPLIES
10- 4510 - 440 -44
5799
H.L. MOORE
FORCEPS
10- 4510- 440 -44
5423
H.L. MOORE
AIRWAYS
10- 4510 - 440 -44
5803
HALLMAN
OIL
27- 4504 - 664 -66
51296
6246
HARMON GLASS WINDSHIELD
HAROLD SWANSON POLICE SERVICES
HENN
CTY SHERIFF
WAORHOUSE /JAIL
HENN
CTY SHERIFF
WAORHOUSE /JAIL
HENN
CTY SHERIFF
WORKHOUSE /JAIL
HENN
CTY SHERIFF
GENERAL SUPPLIES
HENN
COUNTY TREAS.
MICROFICHE
HENN
COUNTY TREAS.
MICROFICHE
HENN
COUNTY TREAS.
MICROFICHE
10- 4248 - 560 -56 197983 6325
10- 4100 - 430 -42
10- 4286 - 220 -22
10- 4286 - 220 -22
10- 4286 - 220 -22
10- 4504 - 440 -44
10- 2135 - 120 -12
10- 2135- 120 -12
10- 4201 - 120 -12
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
03 -19 -90 PAGE 15
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
078H34
03/12/90
135.84
HENN COUNTY TREAS.
MICROFICHE
10- 4201- 200 -20
203.76 *
* * * * **
* ** -CKS .
078H65
03/08/90
100.00
HOFFMAN- WILLIAM
POLICE SERVICES
10- 4100- 430 -42
-
100.00 *
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078J27
03/13/90
12.19
JERRYS
FOODS
MEETING
EXP
10- 4206 - 100 -10
078J27
03/13/90
3.99
JERRYS
FOODS.
MEETING
EXP
10- 4206 - 440 -44
078J27
03/13/90
24.65
JERRYS
FOODS
MISC
10- 4504 - 440 -44
078J27
03/08/90
28.27
JERRYS
FOODS
GENERAL
SUPLLIES
23- 4504 - 611 -61
078J27
03/08/90
25.21
JERRYS
FOODS
GENERAL
SUPLLIES
23- 4504 - 611 -61
078J27
03/13/90
67.10
JERRYS
FOODS
FOOD
27- 4624 - 661 -66
161.41
* * * * **
* *.* -CKS
078J31
03/08/90
32.96
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 260 -26
078J31
03/08/90
81.74
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504- 301 -30
078J31
03/08/90
I 6.57
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 322 -30
078J31
03/08/90
59.56
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 325 -30
078J31
03/08/90
A 30.58
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 420 -42
078J31
03/08/90
148.27
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 440 -44
078J31
03/08/90
40.45
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 520 -52
078J31
03/08/90
45.48
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 540 -54
078J31
03/08/90
105.59
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 560 -56
078J31
03/08/90
i 121.68
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 646 -64
078J31
03/08/90
26.28
JERRYS
HARDWARE
CLEANING
SUPPLIES
10- 4512 - 440 -44
078J31
03/08/90
1,071.00
JERRYS
HARDWARE
SNOW BLOWER
10- 4901 - 305 -30
078J31
03/08/90
32.75
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
27- 4504 - 661 -66
078J31
03/08/90
47:14'
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
27- 4504 - 667 -66
078J31
03/08/90
26.56
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
29- 4504 - 722 -72
078J31
03/08/90
44.51
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
30- 4504 - 782 -78
078J31
03/08/90
.217.33
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
40- 4504 - 801 -80
078J31
03/08/90
35.26
JERRYS
HARDWARE
PAINT
40- 4544 - 802 -80
078J31
03/08/90
11.69
JERRYS
HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
50- 4504- 841 -84
2,185.40
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078J35
03/13/90
16.36
JERRYS
PRINTING
PRINTING
10- 4600 - 100 -10
504111
078J35
03/08/90
56.95
JERRYS
PRINTING
BUSINESS
CARDS
29- 4504 - 722 -72
7734 6317
078J35
03/08/90
413.00
JERRYS
PRINTING
PRINTING
40- 4600 - 800 -80
5020
078J35
03/08/90
70.83
JERRYS
PRINTING
PRINTING
40- 4600 - 800 -80
8268
078J35
03/08/90
1,247.00
JERRYS
PRINTING
PRINTING
40- 4600 - 800 -80
5446 6420
1,804.14
r
* * * * **
•
* ** -CKS
078J47
03/08/90
210.00
JERRYS
LSCAPE MAINT
SNOW REMOVAL
50- 4248 - 841 -84
7218
210.00
* * * * **
* ** -CKS .
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
99.16
CHECK
REGISTER
41.26
03 -19 -90
PAGE 16
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV.'# P.O.
#
MESSAGE
078J59
03/08/90
490.00
JOHN H EKLUND
DUMP BRUSH
10- 4250 - 644 -64
03/08/90
6417
078K35
03/08/90
25.47
490.00
03/08/90
113.61
078K35
03/08/90
130.66
078K35
* * * * **
32.91
078K35
03/08/90
65.62 66.62
REPAIR PARTS
KNOX
COMM
* * *. -CKS
078J74
03/09/90
49.50
JUSTUS LUMBER
PAINT
30- 4544 - 782 -78
28113
6300
LUMBER
078J74
03/09/90
'59.58
JUSTUS LUMBER
PAINT
30- 4544 - 782 -78
25851
5886
078J74
03/09/90
66.57
JUSTUS LUMBER
PAINT
30- 4544 - 782 -78
27857
6221
175.65
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078J99
03/13/90
40.00
JANET CANTON
MILEAGE /LOGIS
10- 4208 - 160 -16
40.00
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078K05
03/08/90
193.23
K & K SALES
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 390 -30
48167
5928
193.23
:;:*::
* ** -CKS
K
03/08/90
336.66
KELLY SERVICES
TEMP HELP
10- 4201 - 490 -49
336.66
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078K35
03/08/90
99.16
078K35
03/08/90
41.26
078K35
03/08/90
11.98
078K35
03/08/90
46.26
078K35
03/08/90
'17.58
078K35
03/08/90
49.99
078K35
03/08/90
90.54
078K35
03/08/90
27.16
078K35
03/08/90
25.47
078K35
03/08/90
113.61
078K35
03/08/90
130.66
078K35
03/08/90
32.91
078K35
03/08/90
65.62 66.62
752.20* 752 - 1°'*
* * * * **
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
MATERIALS
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
MATERIAL
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
REPAIR PARTS
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
TOOLS
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
TOOLS
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
TOOLS
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
TOOLS
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
LUMBER
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
LUMBER
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
REPAIR PARTS
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
PAINT
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
LUMBER
KNOX
COMM
CREDIT
LUMBER
078K57
03/12/90
2,018.60
KUETHER DIST. CO.
BEER
078K57
03/12/90
4,775.85
KUETHER DIST. CO.
BEER
6,794.45
* * * * **
078L04
03/08/90
1,470.76
LAHASS
REPAIRS
078L04
03/08/90
1,210.00
LAHASS
FRAME WORK
2,680.76
* * * * **
10- 4540 - 520 -52 637706 5931
10- 4540 - 520 -52 612616 6125
10- 4540 - 646 -64 612725 6265
10- 4580 - 301 -30 637996 5937
10- 4580 - 646 -64 638177 6277
10- 4580 - 646 -64 638164 6278
- 10- 4580 - 646 -64 612011 6194
10- 4604 - 646 -64 612296 6185
10- 4604 - 646 -64 612217 6268
27- 4540 - 662 -66 612093 6227
27- 4544 - 662 -66 637950 6219
27- 4604- 662 -66 612227 6360
27- 4604 - 662 -66 638135 6371
50- 4630 - 822 -82
50- 4630- 842 -84
10- 4248 - 560 -56 8221 5681
10- 4248 - 560 -56 8560 6117
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
03 -19 -90
PAGE -17
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
078L22
03/12/90
2,280.00
LANDSCAPE & TURF
FUNGICIDE
27- 4564 - 664 -66
4271 6052
2,280.00
* ** -CKS
078L28
03/08/90
435.86
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 301 -30
5696
078L28
03/08/90
171.13
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
FASTENERS
10- 4504 - 322 -30
5834
078L28
03/08/90
326.93
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
.10- 4504 - 322 -30
5694
07BL28
03/08/90
421.23
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 560 -56
5695
078L28
03/08/90
65.07
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
BOLTS
10- 4504 - 560 -56
5696
078L28
03/08/90
389.12
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
MATERIALS
10- 4540 - 520 -52
5833
078L28
03/08/90
330.02
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
SAFETY SUPPLYS
10- 4642 - 301 -30
5697
078L28
03/08/.90
179.76
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
BOLTS /NUTS
40- 4504 - 801 -80
5698
078L28
03/08/90
194.04
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
BOLTS
40- 4540 - 801 -80
5697
078L28
03/08/90
336.15
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
BOLTS /NUTS
40- 4540 - 801 -80
5832
078L28
03/08/90
382.25
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
PARTS
40- 4540- 803 -80
5831
3,231.56
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078L32
03/13/90
155.00
LEAGUE
OF MN CITIES
REGISTRATION
12- 4202- 434 -43
I 155.00
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078L34
03/08/90
22.50
LEEF BROS.
INC.
SHOP TOWELS
27- 4262 - 664 -66
22.50
* * * * **
i
* ** -CKS
078L46
03/13/90
60.13
LIEN INFECTION
CON
SANITATION
27 -4201- 663 -66
5512
60.13
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078L52
03/08/90
176.65 i66.s5
LINJO ASSOC
WATER TREATMENT
30- 4564 - 783 -78
2305 6212
ee c•e *
176.65*
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078L56
03/09/90
7.00
LINHOFF
PHOTO PROC
12- 4508 - 434 -43
164688
7.00
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078L60
03/12/90
4,857.12
LOGIS
DATA ENTRY
10- 4233 - 160 -16
078L60
03/12/90
4,518.65
LOGIS
DATA ENTRY
10- 4233 - 200 -20
078L60
03/12/90
7,015.87
LOGIS
DATA ENTRY
10- 4233 - 420 -42
078L60
03/12/90
5,208.55
LOGIS
DATA ENTRY
40 -4233- 800 -80
078L60
03/12/90
457.61
LOGIS
DATA ENTRY
50- 4233 - 820 -82
078L60
03/12/90
457.64
LOGIS
DATA ENTRY
50- 4233 - 840 -84
078L60
03/12/90
457.61
LOGIS
DATA ENTRY
50- 4233 - 860 -86
22,973.05 *
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
078L97
03/08/90
100.00
MERFELD -BERT
POLICE SERVICES
100.00
kkkkkk
078M02
03/08/90
283.31
MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC.
POLY WAFERS
283.31 *
k k k k k k
078M05
03/08/90
11.00
MAMA
MAMA MEETING
11.00 *
k k k k k k
078M07
03/08/90
2,218.60
MARK VII SALES
BEER
078M07
03/08/90
5,387.10
MARK VII SALES
BEER
078M07
03/08/90
5,131.75
MARK VII SALES
BEER
12,737.45 *
Mkkkkk
078M18
03/08/90
73.60
MCGARVEY COFFEE
COFFEE
73.60 *
078M19
03/08/90
188.52
MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY
REPAIR PARTS
188.52 *
kkkkkk
078M25
03/13/90
9.50
MED OXYGEN & EQUIP
MAINT
078M25
03/13/90
9.50
MED OXYGEN & EQUIP
MAINT
078M25
03/13/90
26.57
MED OXYGEN & EQUIP
MAINT
45.57
k k k k k k
078M27
03/13/90
497.90
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
078M27
03/08/90
465.00
MERIT SUPPLY
PARTS
078M27
03/08/90
467.50
MERIT SUPPLY
PARTS
078M27
03/13/90
293.80
MERIT SUPPLY
RUG
078M27
03/08/90
479.30
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANER
078M27
03/08/90
445.00
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
078M27
03/12/90
820.00
MERIT SUPPLY
MACH /EQUIPMENT
078M27
03/12/90
493.20
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
078M27
03/12/90
495.00
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
078M27
03/08/90
99.90 - $8 --69-
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
078M27
03/08/90
497.80
MERIT SUPPLY
MATTING
078M27
03/08/90
12,281.40
MERIT SUPPLY
REFRIGERATORS
078M27
03/08/90
7,830.83
MERIT SUPPLY
REFRIG DOOR
-25 , iss .. 73 -*
kkkkkk
25,166.63*
078M29
03/13/90
77.25
MESSERLI & KRAMER
AMBULLANCE COLL
03 -19 -90 PAGE 18
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10- 4100 - 430 -42
10- 4540 - 560 -56 2296 5920
10- 4206 - 140 -14
50- 4630 - 822 -82
50- 4630 - 842 -84
50- 4630- 862 -86
10- 4504 - 510 -51 279914 6376
27- 4540 - 664 -66 6244
10- 4274 - 440 -44
10- 4274 - 440 -44
10- 4274 - 440 -44
10- 4504 - 646 -64 23778
10- 4620 - 560 -56 23607
10- 4620- 560 -56 23631
27- 4248 - 662 -66 23806
27- 4504 - 664 -66 23736
28- 4512 - 702 -70 23728
30- 1340 - 782 -78 23809
30- 4504 - 782 -78 23788
30- 4512- 782 -78 23793
40- 4504 - 801 -80 23661
50- 1300 - 003 -00 23395
50- 1300 - 003 -00 23514
50- 1300 - 003 -00 23304
10- 3180 - 000 -00
6379
5933
6006
6463
6289
6288
6459
6445
6452
6110
6425
4433
5185
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
03 -19 -90
PAGE 19
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT -NO. INV. # P.O.
# MESSAGE
77.25
* ** -CKS
078M32
03/08/90
155.85
-M AMUNDSON
CIGARETTES
50- 4634 - 862 -86
078M32
03/12/90
213.34
M AMUNDSON
CIGARETTES
50- 4634 - 862 -86
369.19 *
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078M44
03/13/90.
120.48
MIDWEST CHEM SUPPLY
TRASH BAGS
10- 4512 - 440 744
27147
5798
120.48 *
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078M46
03/13/90
23.60
METZ BAKING CO
BREAD
27- 4624- 662 -66
5511
078M46
03/08/90
6.54
METZ BAKING CO
BREAD
27- 4624 - 663 -66
5511
078M46
03/08/90
25.50
METZ BAKING CO
BREAD
27- 4624- 663 -66
5511
078M46
03/08/90
71.50
METZ BAKING CO
COST OF GOODS
28- 4624 - 703 -70
127.14
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078M63
03/09/90
155.86
MN. BAR
MIX
50- 4632 - 822 -82
078M63
03/08/90
287.85
MN. BAR
MIX
50- 4632 - 842 -84
078M63
03/09/90
386.90
MN. BAR
MIX
50- 4632 - 862 -86
830.61
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
s
078M68
03/08/90
167.80
MN. CELLULAR TEL.
CAR PHONE
10- 4204 - 140 -14
167.80 *
078M69
03/08/90
264.66
MCC /MIDWEST
COST /GOODS SOLD
23- 4624 - 613 -61
34127
5899
078M69
03/08/90
39.18
MCC /MIDWEST
COST /GOODS SOLD
23- 4624 - 613 -61
34966
5903
303.84 *
078M70
03/13./90
86.00
MN. CONWAY
SAFEETY EQUIPMENT
10- 4642 - 420 -42
143342
86.00
* * * **
* ** -CKS
0 78* M73
03/09/90
89.30
MN. ELEVATOR
SERVICE CONTRACT
30- 4288 - 782 -78
20434
6520
89.30
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078M76
03/08/90
196.91
MN. GLOVE
GLOVES
40- 4504 - 801 -80
6004
196.91
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078M80
03/08/90
31.18
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
OFFICIAL PUB
10- 4210 - 140 -14
86955
078M80
03/08/90
32.16
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
AD FOR BIDS
10- 4210 - 140 -14
86800
078M80
03/08/90
32.16
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
AD FOR BIDS
10- 4210 - 140 -14
86799
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
03 -19 -90
PAGE 20
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O.
# MESSAGE
078M80
03/08/90
23.36
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
OFFICIAL PUB
10- 4210 - 140 -14
86953
078M80
03/08/90
12.98
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
OFFICIAL PUB
10- 4210 - 140 -14
86954
078M80
03/08/90
31.53
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
OFFICIAL PUB
10- 4210 - 140 -14
86956
078M80
03/12/90
1,735.00
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
PRINTING
30- 4600 - 781 -78
5283
1,898.37
FGR-- S-PRA-YEi2---
-10- 4540 - 360 -56-
-74- 177 - --
6419
078M81
03/08/90
13.05
MN. TORO INC.
SWITCHES
10- 4540 - 560 -56
798164
5849
078M81
03/08/90
7.34
MN. TORO INC.
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
797967
5849
20.39* -599
078MM85
03/08/90
39.40*
MN WANNER
PARTS FOR SPRAYER
10- 4540 - 560 -56
74177 641V
*-CKS
078M90
03/08/90
1,142.85 1,1439-
MODEL STONE CO.
BLOCK MATERIAL
10- 4540 - 540 -54
200326
6141
1,142.85'`
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078M92
03/12/90
243.50
MONARCH MARKETING
REPAIRS
50- 4516 - 840 -84
359219
078M92
03/08/90
81.35
MONARCH MARKETING
REPAIR
50- 4516 - 840 -84
342731
078M92
03/12/90
55.00
MONARCH MARKETING
REPAIRS
50- 4516 - 860 -86
359218
_
379.85
078M93
03/13/90
20.70
MOTOROLA
HOUSING KIT
10- 4504 - 440 -44
5050
20.70
M ** * **
* ** -CKS
078N07
03/08/90
300.00
MTS NW SOUND
MACH /EQUIPMENT
30- 1340 - 782 -78
81311
6440
300.00
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078N09
03/08/90
364.00
MUNICILITE CO.
TRAFFIC ADVISOR
10- 4620 - 560 -56
2011
6133
364.00 *
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078N21
03/08/90
14.43
NAPA AUTO PARTS
HOSE END
.10 -4540- 560 -56
426022
6115
14.43
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078N48
03/08/90
8,950.00
NO STAR TURF
AERATOR
27- 1340 - 000 -00
201270
6240
078N48
03/08/90
36.00
NO STAR TURF
OIL
27- 4504 - 664 -66
200670
6245
078N48
03/08/90
40.95
NO STAR TURF
REPAIR PARTS
27- 4540 - 664 -66
202090
6374
9,026.95
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078N68
03/08/90
78.30
NORTHSTAR ICE
MIX
50- 4632- 822 -82
078N68
03/08/90
72.36
NORTHSTAR ICE
MIX
50- 4632- 842 -84
078N68
03/08/90
144.72
NORTHSTAR ICE
ICE
50- 4632 - 862 -86
295.38
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 03 -19 -90 PAGE 21
CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
078N82
03/09/90
177.63
078N82
03/08/90
91.33
078N82
03/08/90
56.13
078N82
03/08/90
107.79
078N82
03/09/90
25.00
078N82
03/09/90
63.07-
394.81
* * * * **
078017
03/09/90
585.00
078017
03/09/90
365.00
078017
03/09/90
2,640.00
078017
03/09/90
120.00
078017
03/08/90
62.00
3,772.00
078024
03/08/90
285.00
078024
03/08/90
580.10
865.10
* * * * **
078030
03/13/90
26.62
26.62
078036
03/08/90
18.92
18.92 *
* * * * **
078050
03/12/90
117.15
117.15 *
* * * * **
078P11
03/08/90
255.30
255.30
* * * * **
078P28
03/08/90
364.24
364.24'*
* * * * **
078P30
03/09/90
51.78
078P30
03/08/90
271.31
078P30
03/09/90
269.38
592.47
NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY
NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY
NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY
NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY
NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY
NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY
OFFICE PRODUCTS
OFFICE PRODUCTS
OFFICE PRODUCTS
OFFICE PRODUCTS
OFFICE PRODUCTS
COST /GOODS SOLD
COST /GOODS SOLD
COST /GOODS SOLD
COST /GOODS SOLD
COST /GOODS SOLD
CREDIT
SERVICE CONTRACT
SERVICE CONTRACT
SERVICE CONTRACT
SERVICE CONTRACT
GLARESCREEN
OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING
OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING
OLD DUTCH FOODS CHIPS
OLSON CHAIN & CABLE GENERAL SUPPLIES
OWENS SERVICE CO SERVICE CONTRACT
PARK NIC MED CTR PRE EMP /SCREENING
PLANT EQUIP INC REPAIR PARTS
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING MIX
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING MIX
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING MIX
23- 4624 - 613 -61 169836 6232
23- 4624 - 613 -61 169642 6151
23- 4624 - 613 -61 169587 6150
23- 4624 - 613 -61 169494 5901
23- 4624 - 613 -61 169714 6153
23- 4624 - 613 -61 169642 6151
10- 4288 - 510 -51 80870A 6370
10- 4288 - 510 -51 80870A 6370
10- 4288 - 510 -51 097630 6370
10 -4288- 510 -51 102345 6370
10- 4504- 490 -49 105729 6313
10- 4600 - 420 -42 30670 6083
10- 4600 - 420 -42 30671 5897
27- 4624 - 662 -66 5514
30- 4504- 782 -78 96209 6098
-30- 4288 - 782 -78 45292 6538
10- 4212 - 510 -51
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
* ** -CKS
40- 4540 - 805 -80 12247 6124
* ** -CKS
50- 4632 - 822 -82
50- 4632 - 842 -84
50- 4632 - 862 -86
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
03 -19 -90
PAGE 22
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. #
MESSAGE
078P31
03/08/90
500.00
PETER COTTON
TRAINING
10- 4201 - 440 -44
500.00
lk IY /I 1k It
* ** -CKS
078P35
03/08/90
73.49
PETERSON- BARBARA
MILEAGE
30- 4208 - 781 -78
73.49
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078P44
03/13/90
147.00
PHYSIO CONTROL
RREPAIRS
10- 4248 - 440 -44
E49013
5424
078P44
03/13/90
261.80
PHYSIO CONTROL
FIRST AID SUPPLIES
10- 4510 - 440 -44
E49013
5424
408.80
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078P58
03/08/90
90.00
PLUNKETTS
PRO SERVICES
23- 4201 - 612 -61
S35143
5774
078P58
03/08/90
27.20
PLUNKETTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
28- 4504 - 702 -70
735041
117.20
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078P64
03/08/90
23.60
POMMER CO. INC.
NAME PLATES
10- 4504 - 120 -12
020772
078P64
03/08/90
23.00
POMMER CO. INC.
NAME PLATES
10- 4504 - 120 -12
020772
078P64
03/08/90
23.60-
POMMER CO. INC.
NAME PLATES
10- 4504 - 120 -12
020772
23.00
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078P75
03/08/90
180.00
PREMIER OUTDOOR SERV
PRO SERVICES
30- 4201 - 782 -78
1166
6441
180.00
* * * Y
* ** -CKS
078P80
03/08/90
3,015.86
PRIOR LAKE AGG.
SAND /GRAVEL /ROCK
10- 4522 - 318 -30
3,015.86
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078Q09
9?8Q99-
03/13/90
-66f68 9
145.00
i45.88
QUALITY REFRIG
REFRIG
MAINT
27- 4246 - 662 -66
145.00* gee *
QUALITr;-
04AINT
27 4288 663 68
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078Q20
03/08/90
47.28
QUICK SERV BATTERY
FILTERS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
35428
6321
47.28
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078Q22
03/08/90
275.00
QUIK PRINT
STARTER CARDS
27- 4600 - 661 -66
18919
6456
275.00
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK NO.
DATE
078R12
03/08/90
078R13
03/13/90
REPAIR PARTS
402.09
078R21
03/12/90
078R21
03/12/90
078R21
03/12/90
078R21
03/12/90
078R21
03/12/90
078R22
03/08/90
078R22
03/13/90
078R22
03/09/90
078R23
03/13/90
078R23
03/08/90
* * * * **
078R25
03/08/90
* * * * **
1,931.60
078R33
03/09/90
078R33
03/08/90
078R33
03/09/90
* * * * **
GENERAL SUPPLIES
.078R43
03/08/90
* * * * **
534.76
078R49
03/13/90
* * * Yt f1 *
078R69
03/08/90
REPAIR PARTS
61.95
078503
03/08/90
03 -19 -90 PAGE 23
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10- 4540- 540 -54 14442 5934
10- 4226- 440 -44 16414 5057
* ** -CKS
10- 450,4- 490 -49 200241 5467
10- 4642 - 301 -30 200241 5467
10- 4642- 560 -56 200241 5467
10- 4642 - 646 -64 200241 5467
40- 4642 - 801 -80 200241 5467
10- 4566 - 643 -64 1065 6418
30- 4504 - 782 -78 1048 5686
30- 4504- 782 -78 1043 6521
27- 4540- 664 -66 200212 6444
27- 4540- 664 -66 200233 6214
* ** -CKS
10- 4540 - 560 -56 11522 6187
* ** -CKS
50- 4630 - 822 -82
50- 4630 - 842 -84
50- 4630 - 862 -86
* ** -CKS
10- 4540 - 560 -56 210357 5927
* ** -CKS
10- 4504- 440 -44 020349
* ** -CKS
10- 4206 - 140 -14
* ** -CKS
10- 4504 - 646 -64 5993 5993
CHECK REGISTER
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
402.09
RADIO SHACK
REPAIR PARTS
402.09
132.00
RADIO INSTALLS
RENTAL
132.00
'212.40
RED WING SHOES
SHOES
647.35
RED WING SHOES
SHOES
72.20
RED WING SHOES
SHOES
365.05
RED WING SHOES
SHOES
634.60
RED WING SHOES
SHOES
1,931.60
*
47.04
REM SUPPLIES
WEED SPRAY
- 264.72
REM SUPPLIES
GENERAL SUPPLIES
223.00
REM SUPPLIES
GENERAL SUPPLIES
534.76
*
61.95
REEDS SALES & SERV
REPAIR PARTS
61.95
REEDS SALES &•SERV
REPAIR PARTS
123.90
*
i
38.70
RENTAL EQUIP & SALES
HANDLE /AIR CLEANER
38.70
*
3,295.45'
REX DISTR.
BEER
4,206.95
REX DISTR.
BEER
2,438.75
REX DISTR.
BEER
9,941.15
79.67
RITEWAY
REPAIR PARTS
79.67
9.28
ROAD RESCUE
SOCKETS
9.28.*
98.00
ROSLAND
MEETING EXPENSES
98.00
17.42
S.T. ROBB
CARRIAGE BOLT
03 -19 -90 PAGE 23
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10- 4540- 540 -54 14442 5934
10- 4226- 440 -44 16414 5057
* ** -CKS
10- 450,4- 490 -49 200241 5467
10- 4642 - 301 -30 200241 5467
10- 4642- 560 -56 200241 5467
10- 4642 - 646 -64 200241 5467
40- 4642 - 801 -80 200241 5467
10- 4566 - 643 -64 1065 6418
30- 4504 - 782 -78 1048 5686
30- 4504- 782 -78 1043 6521
27- 4540- 664 -66 200212 6444
27- 4540- 664 -66 200233 6214
* ** -CKS
10- 4540 - 560 -56 11522 6187
* ** -CKS
50- 4630 - 822 -82
50- 4630 - 842 -84
50- 4630 - 862 -86
* ** -CKS
10- 4540 - 560 -56 210357 5927
* ** -CKS
10- 4504- 440 -44 020349
* ** -CKS
10- 4206 - 140 -14
* ** -CKS
10- 4504 - 646 -64 5993 5993
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK
REGISTER
03 -19 -90
PAGE 24
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV.
# P.O. #
MESSAGE
17.42
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078S09
- 03/08/90
140.65
SCHAFER EQUIP CO
RACK FOR VAN
10- 4620 - 560 -56
150317
6011
140.65
*
078S10
03/08/90
429.10
SUBURBAN TIRE &
AUTO
TIRES
10- 4616 - 560 -56
.6784
6109
429.10
*
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078S15
03/08/90
36.98
SEARS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30- 4504 - 782 -78
3548
36.98
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078S27
03/08/90
32.04
SHERWIN WILLIAMS
PAINT
10- 4504 - 646 -64
26480
6123
32.04
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078S34
03/08/90
144.90
SOUTHDALE FORD
AXLE
10- 4540- 560 -56
232167
078S34
03/08/90
56.14
SOUTHDALE FORD
FLYWHEEL
10- 4540 - 560 -56
231615
078S34
03/08/90
164.12
SOUTHDALE FORD
HOSE PLATE
10- 4540 - 560 -56
232342
365.16
*
078S35
03/12/90
37.95
SOUTHERN VACUUM
VACUUM REPAIRS
50- 4236 - 861 -86
37.95
*
078S36
03/08/90
2,891.30
SOUTHSIDE DISTR.
CO.
BEER
50- 4630 - 822 -82
078S36
03/08/90
5,922.70
SOUTHSIDE DISTR.
CO.
BEER
50- 4630 - 842 -84
078S36
03/08/90
448.20
SOUTHSIDE DISTR.
CO.
BEER
50-4630-862 -86
9,262.20
*
-
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078S45
03/13/90
31.65
ST. PAUL BOOK
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 470 -47
921442
078S45
03/13/90
45.41
ST. PAUL BOOK
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 470 -47
848155
77.06
* * *r **
* ** -CKS
078550
03/08/90
100.00
JOHN SHEPARD
POLICE SERVICES
10- 4100 - 430 -42
100.00
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078S54
03/08/90
252.10
STAR TRIBUNE
WANT ADS
10- 4212 - 510 -51
252.10
* * * * **
* ** -CKS
078S61
03/08/90
1,069.57
STATE TREASURER
SURCHARGE REPORT
10- 3095 - 490 -49
078S61
03/08/90
70.00
STATE TREASURER
SURCHAARGE REPORT
10- 3113 - 490 -49
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
1,139.57 *
kkkkkk
078S67
'.03/08/90
3,208.00
STORE FRONT
HUMAN SERVICES
3,208.00 *
k k k k k k
078S73
03/09/90
1,303.99
STRGAR - ROSCOE -FAUSH
PRO SERV ENG
1,303.99 *
kkkkkk
078S77
03/08/90
2,150.15
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
BODY WORK
078S77
03/08/90
100.00
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
TRANS WORK
078S77
03/08/90
28.31
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
078S77
03/08/90
79.80
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
HANDLE
2,358.26
078S78
03/08/90
111.26
SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP
REPAIR PARTS
078578
03/08/90
6.50
SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP
REPAIR PARTS
078S78
03/08/90
1 77.06-
SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP
CREDIT
40.70
k k k k k k
078S87
'
03/12/90
5,750.00
SW•SUB CABLE COMM
CABLE /PROGRAMMING
078S87
03/12/90
4,736.00
SW SUB CABLE COMM
CABLE /PROGRAMMING
110,486.00
kkkkkk
078S92
03/08/90
108.64
SYSTEM SUPPLY
DATA CARTRIDGE
k k k k k k
108.64
078T03
03/08/90
8.90
TARGET
GENERAL SUPPLIES
078T03
03/08/90
16.99
TARGET
COST /GOODS SOLD
25.89
kkkkkk
078T10
03/08/90
49.00
TERRY ANN SALES CO.
CLEANING WIPES
49.00
kkkkkk
078T13
03/13/90
525.00
TOM HORWATH
FORESTRY
078T13
03/13/90
135.00
TOM HORWATH
TREE TRIMMING
660.00
kkkkkk
V
078T16
03/13/90
101.22
TIERNEY BROS INC
MAP LABELING
03 -19 -90 PAGE 25
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
* ** -CKS
10- 4201 - 504 -50 112303
* ** -CKS
60- 1300- 291 -04
* ** -CKS
10- 4248 - 560 -56 6907 5987
10- 4248 - 560 -56 97238
10- 4540 - 560 -56 121537
10- 4540 - 560 -56 121773
10- 4540 - 646 -64 6205
10- 4540 - 646 -64 6260
40- 4540 - 802 -80
* ** -CKS
12- 4224 - 434 -43
12 =4224- 434 -43
* ** -CKS
10- 4504 - 510 -51 30052 6373
* ** -CKS
23- 4504 - 612 -61 102741 5900
23- 4624- 613 -61 102741 5.900
* ** -CKS
27- 4504 - 667 -66 1033 6468
* ** -CKS
10- 4201- 644 -64
10- 4201- 980 -64
* ** -CKS
10- 4504- 440 -44 46588
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
THOMPSON ENTERPRISES
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
THOMSEN - NYBECK
PROSECUTION -
101.22 *
LEGAL
THORPE DISTR.
BEER
078T20
03/08/90
468.50
PROPANE
TOLL COMPANY
468.50 *
TOOLS BY OLSEN
GENERAL SUPPLIES
TRIARCO.ARTS & CRAFT
078T27
03/08/90
77.78
07BT27
03/08/90
174.10
MIX
TWIN CITY GAR. DOOR
251.88 *
* * * * **
078T29
03/08/90
5,466.92
078T29
03/08/90
13,402.36
18,869.28 *
078T30
03/08/90
7,303.25
7,303.25 *
* * * * **
078T40
03/08/90
143.97
078T40
03/08/90
143.97 -
078T40
03/08/90
143.97
143.97 *
* * * * **
078T42
03/08/90
42.12
42.12 *
* * * * **
078T66
03/09/90
60.28
60.28 *
* * * * **
078T74
03/08/90
2,044.80
2,044.80 *
078T88
03/08/90
153.38
078T88
03/08/90
36.24
189.62 *
* * * * **
078T96
03/08/90
134.50
134.50 *
* * * * **
CHECK REGISTER
VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION
THE PRINT SHOP
NEWSLETTER
THOMPSON ENTERPRISES
REPAIRS
THOMPSON ENTERPRISES
LIGHTING
THOMSEN - NYBECK
PROSECUTION -
THOMSEN- NYBECK
LEGAL
THORPE DISTR.
BEER
TOLL COMPANY
PROPANE
TOLL COMPANY
PROPANE
TOLL COMPANY
PROPANE
TOOLS BY OLSEN
GENERAL SUPPLIES
TRIARCO.ARTS & CRAFT
COST /GOODS SOLD
TURF SUPPLY CO.
FERTILIZER
TWIN CITY HOME JUICE
MIX
TWIN CITY HOME JUICE
MIX
TWIN CITY GAR. DOOR
REPLACE CABLE
03 -19 -90 PAGE 26
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
* ** -CKS
10- 4504 - 628 -62 12829 6093
* ** -CKS
27- 4540 - 662 -66 75323 6220\
27- 4540 - 662 -66 075324 6454
* ** -CKS
10- 4201 - 220 -22
10- 4201 - 220 -22
50- 4630 - 862 -86
* ** -CKS
10- 4610 - 560 -56 107016 6029
10- 4610- 560 -56 107016 6029
10- 4610 - 560 -56 107016 6029
* ** -CKS
30 -4504- 782 -78 23614 6436
* ** -CKS
23- 4624 - 613 -61 371213 6235
* ** -CKS
27- 4558 - 664 -66 028642 5820
* ** -CKS
50 -4632- 842 -84
50- 4632 - 862 -86
* ** -CKS
10- 4540 - 540 -54 3361 6325
* ** -CKS
t
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
078U20
03/09/90
45.00
UNIVERSITY OF MN
REGISTRATION
45.00 *
k k k * *
078U30
03/08/90
21.00
US WEST PAGING
PAGER
21.00 *
k *k *k*
078V30
03/12/90
453.09
VANTAGE ELECTRIC
PRO SERVICES
453.09
kk *kkk
.
078V48
03/08/90
34.35
VOTER REG /ELEC SECT
POSTAGE
34.35 *
kkkk **
078V57
03/08/90
105.09
VIKING INDUS CTR
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
105.09 *
078W13
03/08/90
120.00
WALDOR PUMP & EQUIP
SERVICE ON PUMP
120.00 *
kkkkk*
�
078W15
03/08/90
100.00
WALTER JOHNSON
POLICE SERVICES
100.00 *
078W28
03/12/90
511.10
WATER PRODUCTS
RENTAL
078W28
03/12/90
420.00-
WATER.PRODUCTS
CREDIT
91.10
07BW41
03/13/90
19.75
WEST PHOTO
PHOTO SUPPLIES
078W41
03/13/90
93.55
WEST PHOTO
PHOTO SUPPLIES
113.30
* * k k k k
078W44
03/08/90
217.34
WEST WELD SUPPLY CO.
WELDING SUPPLIES
078W44
03/08/90
128.19
WEST WELD SUPPLY CO.
CLAMP
345.53
078W49
03/08/90
146.53
WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT
BRACKETS
03 -19 -90 PAGE 27
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
10 -4202- 260 -26
* ** -CKS
10- 4201 - 640 -64
* ** -CKS
30 -4201- 782 -78 11081 6537
* ** -CKS
10- 4290 - 140 -14
* ** -CKS
10- 4504 - 644 -64 388731 6135
* ** -CKS
40- 4248 - 801 -80 102046 6382
* ** -CKS
10 -4100- 430 -42
* ** -CKS
40- 4226 - 803 -80 8877 4519
40 -4226- 803 -80 112193
* ** -CKS
10- 4508 - 420 -42 34668 5622
10- 4508 - 420 -42 34667 6367
* ** -CKS
10- 4610 - 560 -56 82293 6112
10- 4610- 560 -56 81858 6008
* ** -CKS
10- 4620 - 560 -56 22291 6333
1990 CITY
OF EDINA
10- 4620- 560 -56
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
10- 4620- 560 -56
233580
146.53 *
* * * * **
40- 4540- 801 -80
232791
078W52
03/08/90
100.00
232791
WILLIAMS STEE L
100.00 *
* * * * **
232791
078W66
03/08/90
123.02
078W66
03/08/90
85.71
078W66
03/08/90
451.16
078W66
03/08/90
451.16
078W66
03/08/90
451.16 -
ZIEGLER INC
SEAL
659.89 *
* * * * **
078W92
03/08/90
100.00
GENERAL FUND
100.00 *
* * * * **
COMMUNICATIONS
078Z14
03/08/90
39.60
078Z14
03/08/90
9.60
CAPITAL FUND
49.20
* * * * **
GOLF COURSE FUND
236,106.50
RECREATION CENTER FUND
11,936.00
GUN RANGE FUND'
2,466.44
FUND 30 TOTAL
EDINBOROUGH PARK
11 948 0
11,9��—
37,748.64
�
10,318.80
LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND
574.57
FUND 60 'TOTAL
12,619.76
12'sag.3e-
27,423.23_'-�°2
90,947.63
137,616.25
579,705.82*
$79, 861. '°
_M1
CHECK REGISTER
VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION
WM WALSH
POLICE SERVICES
03 -19 -90 PAGE 28
ACCOUNT PLO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE
* ** -CKS
10- 4100 - 430 -42
* ** -CKS
WILLIAMS STEEL
PAINT
10- 4620- 560 -56
233523
WILLIAMS STEEL
PAINT
10- 4620- 560 -56
233580
WILLIAMS STEEL
STEEL
40- 4540- 801 -80
232791
WILLIAMS STEEL
STEEL
40- 4540 - 801 -80
232791
WILLIAMS STEE L
STEEL
40- 4540 - 801 -80
232791
* ** -CKS
WROBLESKI -HENRY
POLICE SERVICES
10- 4100 - 430 -42
* ** -CKS
ZIEGLER INC
ADAPTER
10 -4540- 560 -56
5943
ZIEGLER INC
SEAL
10- 4540 - 560 -56
5936.
* ** -CKS
FUND 10 TOTAL
GENERAL FUND
FUND 12 TOTAL
COMMUNICATIONS
FUND 23 TOTAL
ART CENTER
FUND 25 TOTAL
CAPITAL FUND
FUND 27 TOTAL
GOLF COURSE FUND
FUND 28 TOTAL
RECREATION CENTER FUND
FUND 29 TOTAL
GUN RANGE FUND'
FUND 30 TOTAL
EDINBOROUGH PARK
FUND 40 TOTAL
UTILITY FUND
FUND 50 TOTAL
LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND
FUND 60 'TOTAL
CONSTRUCTION FUND
TOTAL