HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-07-20_COUNCIL PACKETAGffi®A
EDINA HOUSING AHD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
JULY 20, 1992
7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL
ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA - Adoption of the Consent Agenda items is made by the
Commissioners as to HRA items and by the Council Members as ,'t Council items. All
agenda items marked with an asterisk.( *) and in bold print are.Consent Agenda items and
are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one - motion. There will be no
separate discussion of such items unless a Commissioner or 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.
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
* I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of HBA Meeting of July 6, 1992
II. RELEASE OF OUTLOTS F AND G - South Edina Addition
* III. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
III. ADJOURNMENT
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
* I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of July 6, 1992
II. PUBLIC HEARING - SECOND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 1 - An Ordinance Codifying the
General Ordinances of the City of-Edina, Minnesota; Adopting'a New City Code;
Retaining Certain ordinances ;.and Repealing Certain Ordinances
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. Waiver of Second Reading: 4/5 favorable rollcall vote
of all members of Council required to pass. Final Development Plan Approval of
Property Zoned Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass.
Conditional Use Permit: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass.
A. Preliminary Plat Approval - Mark Dahlquist Addition - Lot 11, Auditor's
Subdivision No. 325 (Contd from 7/6/92)
B. Request to Place Play Structure in Open Space /Conservation Easement - 6024
Fox Meadow Lane (Contd from 7/6/92)
C. Conditional Use Permit - Parking Lot Expansion - Crossview Lutheran Church,
6634 McCauley Trail
* D. CDBG Year %VIII Subrecipient Agreement
* E. Lot Division - Lot 8, Block 1, Sion: Trail 4th Addition (6921 -23 McCauley
Trail)
IV. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS
Agenda
Edina City Council
July 20, 1992
Page 2
V. AWARD OF BIDS
A. 50th & France - .Skylight Canopy
B. Improvement Ho. P -3 - West 49 1/2 Street Ramp Repair
C. Improvement No S -56 - Thielen Avenue Sidewalk
VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. ..pp,roval of Traffic. Safety Committee Minutes of July 14, 1992
B. :ark. Board Recommendation - Braemar Golf Course Nine Hole Expansion
C. Appointments.to Community, Education Services Board
VII. PETITIONS /COMMUNICATIONS
A. Petition for Storm Sever - Between 5701 and 5723 France Av So
B. Petition Relating to Street Improvement No. BA -298 (Blake Road)
VIII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES
I%. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL
X. MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
%I. FINANCE
A. Payment of Claims as per pre -list dated 07/20/92: Total $2,750,649.56 and
for confirmation of payment of Claims dated 06/30/92: Total $310,235.58
SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /EVENTS
Mon Aug 3 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M.
Mon Aug 17 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M.
Mon Sept 7 LABOR DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed
Tues Sept 15 State Primary Election
Mon Sept 21 Regular Council Meeting
Council Chambers
Council Chambers
Polls Open 7:00 AM - 8:00 PL
7:00 P.M. Council Chambers
MINUTES
OF THE ED.INA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ADTHORITY
..JULY 6, 1992
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith,
and Richards.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Motion was made by Commissioner Kelly and was
seconded by Commissioner Rice to approve the HRA Consent Agenda items as
presented.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JUNE 15, 1992, APPROVED Motion was made by
Commissioner Kelly and was seconded by Commissioner Rice to approve BRA
Minutes of June 15, 1992.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*CLAIMS PAID Motion was made by Commissioner Kelly and was seconded by
Commissioner Rice to approve payment of the following HRA claims as shown in
detail on the Check Register dated June 30, 1992, and consisting of one page
totalling $51,101.94.
There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, Chairman Richards declared
the meeting adjourned.
Executive Director
13 A. lTl�
Q ew'Ktt
Nf ^� O
J
�eae
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
To: HRA
From: GORDON L. HUGHES
Date: JULY 20, 1992
Subject:
RELEASE OF OUTLOTS F AND G,
SOUTH EDINA ADDITION
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #
HRA
I, -
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr. Recommends
0
To HRA
❑
To Council
Action
Q
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Release Outlot F and Outlot G, South Edina Development Addition
from Contract for Deed and execute quit claim deed.
Info /Background:
As you know, the Edina HRA is the vendee on a Contract for Deed
with the Hedbergs relative to the undeveloped property in
Centennial Lakes. Included in the Contract for Deed are Outlot F
and Outlot G of South Edina Development Addition. The location
of these outlots is shown on the attached.graphic. Outlot F
measures 23,269 square feet and Outlot G measures 117,729 square
feet. Outlot G is located within the City of Bloomington.
According to the overall development plan for Centennial Lakes,
Outlots F and G comprise the site for a possible hotel
development.
The Redevelopment Agreement for Centennial Lakes recognizes that
the HRA's sole responsibility with respect to Outlot G was to act
as a conduit for passing title from the seller to the ultimate
developer of the site and to cooperate in obtaining an exemption
from real estate taxes for this Outlot. As to the latter point,
;1
t ,
t
the Minnesota Tax Court in 1991, ruled that Outlot G did not meet
the test for exemption from real estate taxes. Therefore,_,' the
underlying owner of the property and the developer (but not the
HRA) are responsible for the payment of real estate taxes for
Outlot G on an ongoing basis. Based upon these circumstances,
the vendor of the Contract for Deed (Hedberg) has requested that
Outlots F and G.be released from the contract. If released, the
vendor would be-in a better position to contest the valuation of
the property with the City of Bloomington and Hennepin County.
Mr. Gilligan and I believe that the HRA is not adversely affected
by this release. We, therefore, recommend the release subject to
the following:
1) The principal balance owed under the contract must be
reduced on a square foot basis based upon the area of
Outlots F and G.
2) The HRA must retain rights to allow its developer to utilize
the billboard located on the Bloomington-parcel for
advertisement of the-Centennial Lakes project.
3) Outlots F and G must continue to be regulated by the traffic
agreement entered into between the cities of Bloomington,
Edina and the South Edina Development Corporation.
Encl.
i
�1t1� I
f
I
tq
W
J.
✓ I % / M - i \
Jrl "•`7»y c� D cp `°
U t / 90 eks ; .'._ - 4' `` O r+ F-2
cp
Pwcol $Fi$�-t1- 1 9-r�- �''.rE�.ltrvk+�(a- ._.... �:� - =•-$4 ►:deli+.+.- --'�'� i
--- --- "-'— ° ----- ! • w .- " — --� "•^"— ` I^ ^mo= ,.0 .c - .—.o " """_ " OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND LANDSCAPING CONCEPT
ftd 0-1 �••-� .ter --� �r I �—�•— » »° — -- » "° '-'_�_� '" UNITED PROPERTIES
ItIrw
1
H
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:51 PM
page 1
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT ,
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT. P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12267
07/20/92
.$282.42
BRW INC.
PROF FEES ARCH AND EN
65749
SOTH STREET
PRO FEE ARCH/
07/20/92
$3,698.96
BRW INC.
PROF FEES ARCH AND EN
65753
CENTENNIAL LAK
PRO FEE ARCH/
<•>
$3,981.38"
12268
07/20/92
$9.62
DEPENDABLE COURIER
MISCELLANEOUS
207832
50TH STREET
MISC
<R)
$9.62.
12269
07/20/92
$5,701.09
MILLER & SCHROEDER I
INTEREST OTHER
070692
CENTENNIAL LAK
INTEREST OTHE
< ">
$5,701.09"
12270
0.7/20/92
$4,800.00
PROSPECT DRILLING &
PARKS
016913
EDINBOROUGH
PARKS 465
< ">
$4,800.00"
12271
07/20/92
$65.02
SEARS
EQUIPMENT
ID -62 -22
CENTENNIAL LAK
EQUIPMENT 456
< ">
$65.02"
12272
07/20/92
$1,116.35
SHAW- LUNDQUIST.ASSOC
PARKS
R -14 HRA
CENTENNIAL LAK
PARKS
<">
$1,116.35"
12273
07,/20/92
$50.00
SOUND ADVISE CONSULT
PROF FEES ARCH AND EN
070992
50TH STREET
PRO FEE ARCH/
<�>
$50.00"
12274
07/20/92
$605..71
VALLEY RICH COMPANY
RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEME
10,917
CENTENNIAL LAK
RESID IMPROVE
< *>
$605.71"
$16,329.17 " -
COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:57 PM page 1
----------------------=------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- --- -- --- ---- -------- - - - - --
FUND # 01 $16,329.17
$16;329.17*
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
JULY 6, 1992
gpT.rr.ATT. Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor
Richards.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion was made by Member Kelly and vas seconded
by Member Rice to approve and .adopt the Council Consent Agenda items as
presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus; Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF JUNE 1 AND JUNE 15, 1992 APPROVED Motion was
made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice to approve the Council
Minutes of the Regular Meetings of June 1. 1992 and June 15, 1992.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON NORMANDAIA GOLF AREA (TRACT R. R.L.S NO. 1050)•
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ADOPTED - OUASI- PUBLIC TO PUBLIC AND OFFICE•
PRELIMINARY REZONING R -1. SINGLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT TO POD -1. PLANNED OFFICE
DISTRICT APPROVED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered
placed on file.
Presentation by Manager
Manager Rosland recalled that following a public hearing on the Normandale Golf
Area on September 23, 1991, the Council had raised several issues relating to the
proposal that the City acquire the Normandale Golf Course. This report is in
response to Council's direction to explore agreements with interested parties
leading to the City's purchase and improvement of Normandale Golf Course,
Normandale Golf Course is a private business owned and operated by the Rauenhorst
family. Because the Rauenhorsts are no longer interested in owning the land, now
is the opportune time.for the City to consider acquiring it. Manager Rosland
then summarized the current proposal as follows:
In order to obtain access to the proposed new clubhouse., an easement has been
obtained from the Shidler Group, owners of the property lying to the east of the
Lake Edina pumping station and just south of the Fidelity State Bank building,
the most logical location for an access drive. The Shidler Group agreed to give
the City the easement under the following conditions:
1. The City build a public driveway as indicated on the Golf Course Overall
Master Plan;.
2. The City prepare plans for reconstruction of a storm water drainage system;
3. The City move trees lying within the easement area to new locations;
4. The City pay reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the Shidler Group in
connection with the granting of the easement; and,
5. The City maintain the driveway, including snow plowing.
As indicated in the Golf Course Overall Master Plan, a redesign of the golf
course would involve blending present acreage of Lake Edina Park and the water
pump site with the .present 22 -acre golf course. Playground equipment would be
relocated to the northeasterly side of the park and the tennis courts would be
removed. A small new parking lot would be built to serve playground users.
Kellogg Avenue would be made into a cul -de -sac and the entire area between
Kellogg and Parklawn Avenues would be fenced.
The course itself would consist of nine holes with total yardage as follows: back
tees, 2,095 yards; middle tees, 1,760 yards; front tees, 1,515 yards; total par,
31. The redesigned course would be unique in the metropolitan area because each
green would be exceptionally large and have two pin placements - one with a
difficult approach, the other a simple., less challenging I approach. Golfers could
play a myriad of demanding or relaxing combinations - from long tees to difficult
pin placements, from short tees to simple mixtures - or any of these mixtures.
All holes would be ultimately designed so that backyards of West Shore Drive and
Sedum Lane neighbors would not be threatened by wildly hit golf balls. There are
no relatively close parallel holes to back property lines.
A financial analysis suggests that the City sell $2.45 Million in bonds with a
30 -year retirement schedule. The proceeds would be used as follows:
Purchase of Property $ 800,000
Parking Lot and Sanitary Sewer
Connection from Kellogg Avenue 200,000
Clubhouse 300,000
Maintenance Equipment' 100,000
Redevelopment of the Golf Course
(including development fees spent to date) 825,000
Capitalized Interest 225.000
TOTAL $2,450,000
The analysis implies that losses would occur until 2010, at which time the course
would become "profitable" after paying bond retirement and operations costs. The
assumptions made in this analysis are appropriate when compared with the use
enjoyed and fees charged by metro area golf courses.
Because the City is presently in the golf course business, certain economies of
scale are available to operate the proposed course in.a highly resourceful
fashion, e.g., all maintenance equipment would be maintained at the large well-
equipped Braemar. maintenance facility with general storage for day -to -day use at
the new clubhouse. Overall management would be provided by current Braemar
staff, with no anticipation of additional staff required.
Manager Rosland concluded by presenting the major elements of the proposal for
purchase as follows:
1) Purchase price and payment - $800,000.00 payable in cash at closing.
2) Property - all of Normandale Golf Course including approximately 6.2 acres
fronting on West 77th Street.
3) Terms - (i) City would remove existing structure from the approximately 6.2
acres fronting on West 77th Street.(the "Acreage "); (ii) Seller would have an
option to reacquire the Acreage for a period of 15 years at an option price of
$1.00; (iii) If Seller reacquires the Acreage and if the contingencies described
above are fully satisfied, the City would amend its Comprehensive Plan to show
use of the Acreage as Planned Office Development, subject to agreed upon setback
lines and a building height restriction of 39 feet; and the Seller would prepare
and file, at Seller's expense, any required plat or registered land survey; (iv)
If Seller does not reacquire the Acreage, the option would expire and City would
issue a resolution for the value of the Acreage at that time as a gift from the
Seller; (v) During the 15 year option period, the City would maintain the Acreage
and neither the Seller nor any other person or party shall have the right to use
the Acreage for any purpose.unless agreed to and approved by the City.
In summary, Mayor Richards said the proposal is for the City to purchase the
Normandale Golf area of approximately 31 acres for $800,000.00, with the 6.2
_ acres proposed to be rezoned from R -1 District to POD -1 Planned Office District,
subject to agreed upon setback lines and a building height restriction of 39
.feet. He mentioned that he had met on a number of occasions with Mark Rauenhorst
to negotiate the proposal now before the Council.
n
Public Comment
Joseph Stoutenburgh, 7449 West Shore Drive, stated he understood from the last
public hearing that another independent financial analysis was to be sought about
the viability-and cost of nine holes.of golf. In response Manager Rosland said
confirmation was acquired from another financial group that felt the analysis was
reasonable and just. Member Rice added that he had asked the Howell Group, whose
business is daily fee analysis, to look at the projections. Their response was
that the projections were sustainable and also conservative, and they wished they
had known the golf course was for sale.
Bill Hanson, 7457 West Shore Drive, asked for clarification of the buy -back
option. Mayor Richards said that if within the next 15 years the Seller chooses
to take back the approximately 6.2 acres it would.be at no cost to the Seller.
Tom Anderson, 7453 West Shore Drive, raised the following issues: 1). The golf
course has been for sale for a long time, how could the Howell Group not know
about it; 2) The proposed fees for nine holes of golf in ten years would be
astronomically high; 3) Would the proposed building height limit be from current
grade level and would it include rooftop mechanical equipment; 4) Would the
proposed berm be adequately landscaped; 5) Could another governmental entity by
eminent domain take over the property at some time in the future; 6) Original
intent of the golf course was to provide a buffer zone between commercial and
residential which is now being modified at the narrowest point; and 7) The golf
course could be a viable piece of property as it exists if it were maintained by
the present owner. He concluded by saying he objected to the proposal as
presented. In response, Manager Rosland said the building height restriction of
39 feet would be measured from current grade, not including possible mechanicals
on the roof. The proposed berm would be landscaped with both coniferous and
other tree types to provide screening for the homes on West Shore Drive.
Tass Von Schmidt - Pauli, 6817 St Patricks Lane, asked what would be the next
steps for the property, when would the funding be exercised and would there be
further hearings on the issue. Mayor Richards answered that if the Council
wishes to proceed: 1) the next step would be to enter into a purchase agreement
for acquisition of the property pursuant to the terms and conditions as stated;
2) a bond sale would be scheduled in 1992, for the.purpose of commencing
construction in 1992, with the expectation of re- opening the golf course in
Spring 1994, and 3) the public hearing process would be completed if the Council
gives an affirmative vote.
David Byron, 7433 West Shore Drive, commented that if the Council approves
entering into a purchase agreement for the property that all appropriate steps be
taken to memorialize the understandings as encumbrances and liens on the property
to avoid misunderstandings as has happened in the past. He commended the Mayor
and Manager for their efforts in negotiating the proposal as now presented with
the office building height restriction. He said he and his neighbors are still
concerned about the impact the rezoning to POD -1 District will have on their
properties and hoped that the Council would understand why it would be difficult
for them to accept anything of the magnitude that is being discussed.
Bill Milota stated that he was representing John Walsh of Walsh Title Company,
4820 W. 77th Street, and owner of that building. He made the following comments
regarding the proposed rezoning: 1) The property should be maintained for the use
it has had historically, 2) Once rezoned, any use of the property that fits
within that zoning is fair game, 3) The number of buildings to be placed on the
property is not contained within the proposed amendment, 4) The population
density in terms of tenants, vehicular traffic, density and frequency of usage
may not be easily controlled if rezoning is given at this time that gives the
property owner carte blanche to design whatever may be commercially feasible in
the future, 4) Values of property surrounding the golf course have been
established and the owners have relied on the continuance of the present use. He
concluded by saying he wanted to go on record as opposing the rezoning in order
to allow the Council and citizens of Edina a greater flexibility in the future to
look at the specifics of the development before it is bound to give its consent.
Council Comment /Action
Mayor Richards reminded Council of the City's mission statement that Edina is a
premier residential community with single family detached housing. He mentioned
the concerns of the neighborhood that the existing buffer be maintained. Buying
the land and keeping it in public ownership would be a positive approach to
maintaining that buffer. This would not be an encroachment or a diminution of
the buffer, but rather an enhancement and protection that it will always be there
without running the risk that some day a proposal could come forth for
development of the golf course site. For those reasons, Mayor Richards said he
would support the proposal.
Member Rice commented that he also would support the proposal as he felt it would
be a positive for the neighborhood. He said he agreed with Mr. Byron's comment
that appropriate steps be taken to memorialize in the documents the terms agreed
upon. He added that, in his experience with real estate, the concerns regarding
diminishing property values was not justified or warranted.
Manager Rosland answered Member Smith that if the proposal is approved the City
would have unlimited use of the 6.2 acre portion of the property; the seller's
use would be prohibited unless the option is exercised. Further, the use option
would follow.the land and not the present owner.
Member Paulus clarified her previous position that while the neighborhood is
going through this transition residential property sales in the area will be
questionable as single family buyers are very hesitant if anything looks like
commercial usage. With land as scarce as it is in the City, there is also the
possibility that the site could be developed with more density. While the
proposal is not perfect, e.g. guaranteeing no commercial building on the 6.2
Acreage but knowing that if one would be built it would have be limited to a
height limit „of 39..feet, it seems to be the best solution.
Member Smith made a motion to (i) adopt the following resolution amending the
Comprehensive Plan and (ii) to grant First Beading of the following ordinance,
with both actions subject to execution of a purchase agreement specifying terms
as presented in the proposal for purchase relative to setback lines, building
height restriction, etc.:
RESOLUTION AMENDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, the.City Council of the City of Edina adopted the Comprehensive Plan
1980 on December 21, 1981, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.864; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development and Planning Commission of the City of Edina
has approved an amendment to the Comprehensive.Plan 1980, on September 4, 1991;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina has reviewed such amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan 1980 and is in concurrence with the decision of.the Community
Development and PI—ing Commission;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Edina, that it
hereby adopts the amendment to the Comprehensive P1an.1980 for land uses
designated as quasi - public to public and office as follows:
(Legal description to be inserted)
ORDINANCE NO. 825 -A47
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 825)
BY ADDING TO THE PLANNED OFFICE DISTRICT (POD -1)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MIIMESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 6 of Ordinance No. 825 of the City is amended by adding.
the following thereto:
"The extent of the Planned Office District (Sub - District POD -1) is enlarged
by the addition of the following property:
(Legal description to be inserted)
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
and publication.
Motion for adoption of the resolution and First Reading of Ordinance No. 825 -A47
was seconded by Member Rice.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Resolution adopted; First Reading granted.
(Mayor Richards left the meeting at 7:55 P.M. and Mayor Pro -tem Kelly assumed the
Chair for the remainder of the meeting.)
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED FOR 3220 SOUTHDALE CIRCLE (NC DONALD'S)
Presentation by Planner
Planner Larsen recalled that at the .last meeting the Council had continued the
public hearing on final development plan approval for the proposed rebuild of
McDonald's restaurant at 3220 Southdale Circle so that residents to the east
could be contacted for comment about the plan.
He reported that on July 1, 1992, a meeting was held at the restaurant to solicit
neighborhood reaction. The meeting was hosted by McDonald's representatives
because they were looking for comments on all facets of the operation, not just
zoning related issues. Phone conversations were held with neighbors not
attending that meeting. Two.alternative plans were reviewed: 1) Site plan
showing the prescribed 50 foot setback from the east property line but with
parking located adjacent to the east property line, and maintaining the existing
landscape buffer, and 2) Site plan showing building moved to the east with a
setback of 28 feet from the east property line, with parking spaces moved to west
side of the building. The consensus of the property owners, either in attendance
or by telephone contact, was that the building be located to the east (28 foot
setback) so as to limit the activity /noise to the .west side of-the building.
This is the plan supported by staff and recommended by the Planning Commission.
Other issues raised not related to the final:development plan were: garbage
pickup at 7:00 A.M. on Sunday mornings, .noise from the speaker at the drive -thru
menu board, parking lot noise, and to any change in hours of operation.
Presentation by Proponent
Jerry Roper, project manager for McDonald's, reported that in response to the
issues raised a later Sunday garbage pick -up would be arranged,.a face -to -face
order person would replace the speaker post at the drive -thru menu board, and
they will work staff and.the landscape architect to find a species of tree which
would provide screening but would not interfere with .the NSP power line.
Council Comment /Action
In response to Member Smith, Planner Larsen concluded that the residents voiced
no concern with exhaust fumes from vehicle stacking on the McDonald's property.
Member Smith said he could not support the project without an indication that
McDonaId's would take full responsibility if exhaust fumes become an issue.
Mr. Roper said the issue never came up, also they did not feel exhaust would
become a problem because drive -thru customers are serviced quickly. However, if
it were perceived as a problem in the future they would try to address it if it
were within their means. Attorney Gilligan stated that.the issue of excess
exhaust fumes could be made a part of the record as a good faith promise on the
part of McDonald's, but would be difficult to enforce.
Member Rice asked what would be-the hardship for granting the setback variance
from the east property line. Planner Larsen answered that the hardship would be
the shape of the property. From a practical.point of view, he explained that the.
McDonald's property is in the same zoning district as the Galleria and Southdale
and.when you take a small piece of property and apply that zoning it can become a
hardship.
Member Smith made a motion to approve the final development plan for McDonald's.
3220 Southdals Circle, which places all parking on the west side of the building,
subject to a commitment from McDonald's to mitigate the problem if exhaust fumes
become an issue for the adjacent residents. The motion failed for lack of a
second.
Member Smith then made a motion to approve the final development plan and moved
adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR MC DONALD'S RESTAURANT
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the
Final Development Plan for McDonald's Restaurant, 3220 Southdale Circle, which
placed all parking on the west side of.the building, as presented at the regular
meeting of the City Council of July 6, 1992, be and is hereby approved.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Paulus.
Member Rice commented that he could not support the final development plan
because he felt the real reason for rebuilding was to provide more seating,and
parking.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Smith
Nays: Rice
Resolution adopted.
*REOUEST TO PIACE PLAY STRUCTURE IN OPEN SPACE /CONSERVATION EASEMENT (6024 FOX
MEADOW LANE) CONTINUED TO JULY 20, 1992 Notion was made by Member Kelly and was
seconded by Member Rice to continue the request to place a play structure in the
open space /conservation easement at 6024 Fox Meadow Lane to July 20, 1992.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR MARK DABLOUIST ADDITION (LOT 11. AUDITOR'S
SUBDIVISION NO. 325) CONTINUED TO JULY 20, 1992 Motion was made by Member Kelly
and was seconded by Member Rice to continue the matter of preliminary plat
approval for Mark Dahlquist Addition, Lot.11, Auditor's Subdivision No. 325, to
July.20, 1992. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*LOT DIVISION GRANTED FOR LOT 4 AND 5. BLOCK 1. LANDMARK ADDITION (4950 MALIBU
DRIVE ) Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice for
adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land constitute separate parcels:
Lot 5, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION, and
Lot 4, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION
WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire'to subdivide said tracts
Into the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "Parcels "):
Parcel A
Lot 5, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION, together with the northerly 5..00 feet of
Lot 4, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION, as measured perpendicular to and
parallel with the common lot line of said Lot 5 and Lot 4, all in Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
Parcel B
Lot 4, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION, except the northerly 5.00 feet of said
Lot 4, as measured perpendicular to and parallel with the common lot line
of said Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION, all in Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the compliance with the Subdivision and
Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and
said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the
Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance
Nos. 804 and 825.
NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina
that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is
hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 804 and
Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof
as separate tracts of land but are not waived.for any other purpose or as to any
other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further
subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent
ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may
be provided for by those ordinances.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*HEARING DATE OF 7/20292 SET FOR PLANNING MATTER Motion was made by Member Kelly
and was seconded by Member Rice setting July 20, 1992, as hearing date for,the
following planning matter:
1) Conditional Use Permit for Parking Lot Expansion - Crossviev Lutheran Church,
6645 McCauley Trail.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT NOS. BA -296. BA -300. BA -301 (Contract 92 -7)
Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid
for Street Improvement Nos. BA -296, BA -300, BA -301, to recommended.low bidder,
Hardrives, Inc., at $86,226.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes
UOTE AWARDED FOR INSURANCE RENEWALS - WORKERS' COMPENSATION. AUTOMOBILE
LIABILITY, LIQUOR LIABILITY AND GENERAL LIABILITY Motion was made by Member
Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice to award insurance renewals for workers'
compensation, auto liability, liquor liability and general liability to
recommended quoter, Home Insurance Company, at $576,915.00.
Motion was carried on rollcall vote - five.ayes.
*OUOTE AWARDED FOR INSURANCE RENEWAL - CITY PROPERTY Motion was made by Member
Kelly and,was seconded by Member Rice to award insurance renewal for City
property to recommended quoter, Hartford Insurance Company, at $40,509.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*QUOTE AWARDED FOR INSURANCE RENEWAL - BOILER AND MACHINERY Motion was made by
Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice to award insurance renewal for
boiler and machinery to recommended quoter, The Travelers Insurance Company, at
$7.359.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR COOLER DOORS AND BEER BACKS - YORK LIQUOR STORE Motion was made
by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice for award of.bid for 16 cooler
doors and six level beer racks for York Liquor Store, to recommended low bidder.
Stan Morgan and Associates. at $14.936.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
REPORT GIVEN ON PARKING MONITOR FOR 50TH & FRANCE COMMMCIAL AREA Assistant
Manager Hughes recalled that on May 18, 1992, Council reviewed a report from the
Police. Department relative to the parking enforcement effort that had been
conducted during the prior six months. Council directed staff to prepare a
recommendation as to ongoing enforcement efforts at 50th & France.
Staff met with representatives of the 50th & France Business and Professional
Association on June 22, 1992. Staff and the committee reviewed alternatives for
ongoing parking ramp enforcement and agreed that a part -time individual scheduled
for.approximately,20 hours per week would provide the level of enforcement
desired at 50th & France. The part -time employee would be in uniform and would
be equipped with a portable radio in order to contact the Police Department.
Duties would include not only parking enforcement, but also monitoring of the
ramps to enhance the safety of shoppers and employees.
Staff would estimate the annual cost of the part -time employee to be
approximately $9,850.00, which includes the cost of.a.uniform and training by the
Police Department. In addition, the program would require the purchase of a
portable radio at approximately $1,200.00. Staff would recommend that the cost
of the program be shared equally by the City and the property owners. at 50th &
France. It was recommended that the City's share be derived from revenues coming
from the sale of. parking permits. These revenues have averaged $10,042.00 per
year for each of the last five years.
Assistant Manager Hughes pointed out that parking permit revenues are a source of
funds for ongoing rehabilitation work in the.municipal parking ramps. As -the
ramps.age, cost for ramp maintenance and repair will increase. The Association .
has been advised of this concern and was told that it is doubtful that the City
would use general fund revenues for such maintenance and repairs. Therefore, the
use of parking permit revenues for.enforcement purposes may result in higher
assessments in the future for maintenance work and should be considered when
reviewing the funding request for the enforcement agent.
In response to Member Paulus, Assistant Manager Hughes said the work hours for
the enforcement agent would hopefully be during varied peak parking times with
emphasis on parking enforcement. During a previous six -month trial period of six
hours of enforcement per week a definite enforcement presence was established.
The employee would not be in a vehicle, but with an increase in enforcement hours
the three ramps could be adequately covered. Member Paulus also asked if the
paid parking permits could be sustained at the present rate because many of the
employees work parttime. Assistant Manager Hughes said the numbers of parking
permits sold has remained quite constant over the years, but may decrease
somewhat. He agreed the position could have a high degree of turnover but
ideally it could be filled by a young retiree.
Member Smith asked if the 50th & France business owners have made a commitment to
control their employees' parking. Hosmer Brown, representing the 50th & France
Association, said there is a strong commitment to control.the parking of their
employees. He noted that during their discussions, two issues came up: 1) the
need to control parking of employees and customers, and 2) the problem of
vandalism. The Association feels that the parking permit fees are a source that
should be used for this purpose. Commercial enterprises are viciously
competitive and the corner is competing with all the malls, strip development,
etc. As landlords and business owners they are attempting to keep costs and
prices down because there is a limit to what 'can be passed on to tenants and.
customers. The association proposes that:
1) Start -up costs be paid from the existing parking permit fees fund, i.e.
uniforms, radio, training.
2) That a percentage as police protection be-assigned to the cost and paid for
from the general funds of the City as a governmental function. One -half of
what is then left of the annual cost would be paid from permit fees and the
remaining cost could be assessed back to the 50th & France property owners.
Member Rice asked how much is currently-in the parking permit fees fund and the
estimated cost for ramp work. Assistant Manager Hughes said the parking permit
fees are co- mingled with tax increments and other revenues. The fund balance is
approximately.$117 ",000.00; expenditures for ramp repair work are estimated at
about $50,000.00.
In response to questions of the Council, Chief Swanson said the uniform for the
parking monitor would be similar to that of the Community Service Officers. The
question of visibility is addressed more directly by the hours the agent will be
on duty rather than appearance. Of the 168 hours in a week, the agent would be
scheduled for 20 hours or less than 1/8 of the time; vandalism occurs at all
times of the day or night. Neither supervision nor training of the agent has
been established as yet. He explained that when the new ramp at West 49 1/2
Street was built security was part of the plan, e.g. video cameras, people
present, etc. At.this time there does not seem to be a problem-and Chief Swanson
said the current police patrol in the area would continue.
Member Paulus asked if having a parttime monitor would increase the City's
liability because residents may have a.false sense of security. Attorney
Gilligan responded that he did not believe the City's exposure would be any
greater. Member Paulus said she did not believe one agent working 20 hours per
week would be a solution - only a bandaid. Because the City has a large
financial commitment in the newly constructed third parking ramp, she would only
vote for a 50/50 split between the City and the 50th & France property owners to
pay for the enforcement agent. -
Member Smith commented that if this individual was supervised by the Police
Department it could create difficulty with union contracts for other City
employees.
Member Smith made a motion to authorize the hiring of a parttime parking monitor
to provide parking enforcement for 20 hours per week at 50th & France, with the
cost to be split 50/50 between the City and the 50th & France property owners,
and with startup costs, e.g. uniforms, equipment_ and training to be borne by the
City. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus.
Member Rice interjected that he felt this should be one year in duration as it
would sink or swim depending on the personality of the person hired. The person
could promote commerce on the corner, ultimately get people to park where they
should park and generally promote good will. He further hoped the City would be
liberal in providing equipment with perhaps occasional use of a City vehicle.
Member Smith then amended the motion by adding that the hiring of the person be
for one year from the start date with review by the Council on September 1, 1993.
Amendment was seconded by Member Paulus. Mayor Pro -tem then called for vote on
the motion as amended.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith
Motion carried.
NINE MILS CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD APPOINTMENTS MADE Manager Rosland
advised Council that 1992 schedule from the Hennepin County Commissioners for
committee appointments includes two terms expiring as of September 29, 1992 on
the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Board: Aileen Kulak and Helen McClelland.
By letter, Aileen Kulak has asked Council's support for reappointment. Manager
Rosland suggested that Council consider supporting reappointment of Aileen Kulak
and that Helen McClelland be contacted as to her interest in reappointment.
Member Bice introduced the following resolution and moved adoption:
RESOLUTION
AREAS, the term of Aileen Kulak on the Nine -Mile Creek Watershed District Board
will end on September 29, 1992;
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that it
hereby recommends and nominates. Aileen Kulak to the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners for re- appointment to the Pine -Mile Creek Watershed District Board
and urges the Commissioners to approve the re- appointment. Motion was seconded
by Member Smith.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith
Resolution adopted.
1991 CITY OF EDINA AUDIT DISCUSSED Manager Rosland said that in response to
Council's request, the 1991 City of Edina Audit is on the agenda for discussion.
He pointed out that the auditors did not submit a management letter this year,
and that apparently the control procedures the Finance Department has developed
are working.
Manager Rosland reminded the Council that the reserve in the General Fund has
diminished due in part to taxes not collected, purchase of property by the City
and some unforseen costs. He said the policy of the City has been to not
maintain a large fund balance on the premise that the taxpayer today should pay
for today and the taxpayer tomorrow should pay for tomorrow.. However, he said he
felt the reserve fund should be strengthened.
Member Smith asked if the audit fee paid is in line with that for surrounding
cities of the same size and if it included audit'of The Edina Foundation.
Finance Director Wallin said the audit costs $21,000.00 per year which is not
expensive considering the number of enterprise funds of the City. The Edina
Foundation is a separate entity and would not be included in the audit for the
City. He said he would acquire comparable audit costs of other cities and report
back.
Member Rice referred to the ratio of net bonded debt to tax capacity and the net
bonded debt per capita on page 6 of the audit and asked if these were reasonable.
Finance Director said he could get.comparisions with other cities.and report
back. No formal action was taken.
*CIA31S PAID Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Bice to
approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register
dated July 1, 1992, and consisting of 38 pages: General Fund $352,796.70; CDBG
$2,700.00; Cable $21,479.49; Working Capital Fund $6,410.84; Art Center
$11,850.38; Pool $66,893.44; Golf Coarse $62,208.10; Arena $11,198.13; Gun Range
$126.70; Edinboroagh /Centennial Lakes $37,947.01;.Utilities $315,870.73; Storm
Sewer $6,880.42; Liquor Dispensary $72, 295.11; Construction Fund $48,686.43;
TOTAL $1,017,343.48.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Pro -tem Kelly
declared the meeting adjourned at 9:40 P.M.
City Clerk
I
O
N
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
From: GORDON L. HUGHES
Date: JULY 20, 19 9 2
Subject:
PUBLIC HEARING -
SECOND READING OF EDINA
ORDINANCE NO. 1
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # II.
Consent (7
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends
To HRA
To Council
Action ❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
0
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Grant Second Reading to Edina. Ordinance No. 1.
Info /Background:
On June 1, 1992, the City Council granted First Reading for Edina
Ordinance No. 1, An Ordinance Codifying the General Ordinances of
the City. On July 20, 1992, the Council will conduct a public
hearing for the purpose of considering Second Reading and final
enactment of Ordinance No. 1.
Attached for your consideration are the following items:
1) The City Code as amended in accordance with the Council's
direction of June 1, 1992. ,
2) Edina.Ordinance No. 1, An Ordinance Codifying the General
Ordinances of the City.
3) A compilation of letters which have been received since June
1, 1992, relative to the codes.
0
0
Report and Recommendation /Ordinance No. 1
July 20, 1992
Page two
The Council should direct its attention in particular to Section
460, Signs, and Section 1045, Parking and Storage of Vehicles.
The revised language in these sections has been highlighted for
your review. We believe that these revisions reflect the
direction that was provided by the City Council in connection
with granting First Reading of Ordinance No. 1. We also wish to
point out that staff has now completed the final" "clean -up" of
the entire code. Therefore, numerous minor changes as to
language, punctuation, format, etc., have been made. We do not
believe any of these changes are substantive in nature, requiring
special Council attention.
Adoption Process:
Following conclusion of discussion or testimony, the Council
should offer and adopt any modifications or amendments to
individual code sections. Staff recommends that the Council then
consider enacting Ordinance No. 1, as modified or amended. The
enactment of this ordinance requires a three - fifths favorable
vote. However, State law requires a four - fifths favorable vote
for adoption of Section 850, the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, if
Ordinance No. 1 is adopted on a three - fifths vote, we recommend
that Section 850 be segregated from the balance of the code and
acted on separately. If the City Council enacts Ordinance No. 1,
staff would proceed to publish this ordinance in the Edina Sun
Current on July 29, 1992. (Please note that only Edina Ordinance
No. 1 is published, not the entire City Code). Following
publication of Ordinance No. 1, the City Code becomes effective.
ORDINANCE NO. 1
AN ORDINANCE CODIFYING THE GENERAL ORDINANCES
OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA; ADOPTING A NEW
CITY CODE; RETAINING CERTAIN ORDINANCES; AND
REPEALING CERTAIN ORDINANCES
THE CTTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
ORDAINS:
Section 1. Codification; Authority; Evidence. The ordinances of a
general and permanent nature of the City of Edina, Minnesota, including provisions
not heretofore adopted, are hereby codified into the Edina City Code, consisting of
Chapters i through 14, together with all tables, maps, indices and charts made a
part of such Chapters, are hereby adopted and declared to constitute a single, original
and comprehensive codification of the ordinances of the City. This codification is
done by the authority of Minnesota Statutes, 1990, Section 415.02 and 415.021. This
codification is hereby declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City of
Edina.
Section 2. Title. The codification may be cited as the "Edina City Code,"
and is sometimes referred to herein and in the Edina City Code as "this Code" or
"the Code."
Section 3. Reveal of Prior Ordinances; Retained Ordinances. All
ordinances and parts of ordinances of a general or permanent nature passed,
adopted and approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance and not included
in the Code or recognized and continued in force by reference in the Code, are
hereby repealed; provided, that, in construing the provisions of this ordinance, the
following ordinances shall not be deemed to be repealed but are hereby retained and
preserved and shall continue in full force and effect even though not included in
the Code and notwithstanding adoption of the Edina City Code:
(a) Any ordinance promising or guaranteeing the payment of
money by the City, or authorizing the issuance of any bonds of
the City or any evidence of the City's indebtedness, or
authorizing any contract or obligation entered into or assumed
by the City.
(b) Any ordinance appropriating funds, levying or imposing taxes;
or relating to an annual budget.
(c) Any ordinance relating to salaries of city officers and employees
or to compensation or pay plans or classification plans for City
officers or employees.
(d) Any ordinance annexing territory to, or detaching territory from,
the City, or extending or contracting the boundaries of the City,
including, without limitation, Ordinances No. 15 and 15 -1.
(e) Any ordinance authorizing, providing for or otherwise relating
to any public improvement,or the acquisition by the City of any
property or property right.
(f) Any ordinance making or levying assessments for public
improvements.
(g) Any ordinance approving any special law applicable to the City.
(h) Any ordinance making a street name change, including, without
limitation, Ordinances No 164, 164-1 through 164 -20 and 164-22
through 164 -44.
(i) The following ordinances granting or amending franchises in
the City of Edina:
Ordinance No. 245 -A1
Ordinance No. 1116
Ordinance No. 1120
(j) Any ordinance imposing or amending a moratorium which
moratorium is still in effect as of the effective date of this
ordinance.
(k) Ordinance No. 112, as amended, creating the staggered terms for
council members, and the four year terms for council members,
including the Mayor.
Section 4. Effect of Repeal; Licenses and Permits. The repeal of any
ordinance by the preceding Section shall not affect or impair any act done or right
vested or ,accrued or any proceeding,. suit or prosecution, all of which shall remain
in full force and effect as if such repealed ordinance had remained in force. No
offense committed and no liability, penalty or forfeiture, either civil or criminal,
incurred prior to the effective date of this ordinance, shall be discharged or affected
by the repeal or alteration of any ordinance by this ordinance or the Code. The
repeal of any ordinance under the preceding Section shall not be construed to revive
-2-
any ordinance. or part of an ordinance which was previously repealed by any
ordinance repealed by this ordinance. -Licenses and permits issued by the City in
accordance with ordinances then applicable shall not be deemed revoked by the
repeal of such ordinances, but shall continue, unless suspended or revoked, for the
period for which they were issued. From and after the date on which the Edina City
Code becomes effective, every existing license and licensee shall be subject to the
provisions of the Edina City Code under which a license for the same purpose
would be issued, or the holder of a license would be regulated. Permits and
permittees now existing shall likewise be subject to the provisions of the Edina City
Code under which a permit for the same purpose would be issued, or the holder of
such permit would be regulated.
Section 5. Subsequent Ordinances. Ordinances'passed after the
effective date of this ordinance shall be passed as amendments or additions to the
Code unless they are of limited or special application, or are otherwise deemed not
to be a part of the Code in which event such ordinances shall be retained by the City
Clerk but separate from the Code. Ordinances of limited or special application, or
otherwise deemed not to be a part of the Code, nevertheless shall be enforceable as
other ordinances which are a part of the Code. Amendments or additions to the
Code shall be a part of the Code from and after their effective date and shall be
incorporated into the Code in the manner provided in Section 6 hereof. Reference
or citation to the Code shall be deemed to mean and include all amendments and
additions then a part of the Code.
Section 6. Revisions. The Code has been prepared in loose -leaf form
so that it may be kept up to date regularly by the insertion of revised or additional
pages. The City Clerk or City Attorney shall prepare revised and additional pages
after the adoption of any amending or additional ordinance so as to keep the Code
Lip to date at all times.
Section 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph,
subparagraph, sentence, clause or phrase of the Code is, for any reason, held to be
invalid or unenforceable as to any person or circumstance, the application of such
section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, sentence, clause or phrase to persons
or circumstances other than those as to which it shall be held invalid or
unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and all other provisions of the Code, in
all other respects, shall be and remain valid and enforceable.
Section 8. Part of Code. This ordinance shall be, and is, a part of the
Code.
Section 9. Publication and Distribution. A copy of the Code, marked
"Official Copy," shall be kept. on file in the office of the City Clerk and shall be
available for all persons desiring to examine the Code. A substantial quantity of the
-3-.
Code shall be printed or otherwise reproduced for general distribution to the public.
Copies of the Code, or any portion thereof, shall be available to any person upon
payment of such copying or other reproduction charges as have been established by
the Council.
Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance and the Edina City Code
shall be in full force, and shall take effect, from and after the adoption and.
publication of this ordinance.
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Published in the Sun -Current:
ATTEST:
Clerk
., a
Mayor
AGENDA ITEM II.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Members of the City Council
Kenneth E. Rosland
FROM: Jerome P. Gilligan
DATE: July 17,1992
RE: Constitutional Challenges to Code Section 1045
The City has received a letter from Mr. Gary Bartolett commenting on
proposed Code Section 1045 which relates to the parking and storage of vehicles. In
his letter he raises a number of constitutional challenges to Code Section 1045,
including that it is unconstitutionally vague and that the restrictions contained
therein with respect to the parking and storage of ' vehicles amount to an
unconstitutional taking of property without compensation.
To be upheld, an ordinance must be a valid exercise of the City's police
powers. Code Section 1045 was proposed both to promote the appearance of the -
community and to protect the safety of residents of the City. It is unquestioned that
actions taken by the City to protect its citizens fall within the police powers of the
City. Under MS §412211 subd. 32, the City may "provide for... the promotion of
health, safety, order, convenience and general welfare..." The United States
Supreme Court and the Minnesota Supreme Court have each held the right to
regulate for the general welfare also includes the right to regulate for aesthetic
purposes. Code Section 1045, if enacted, should be upheld against a challenge that it
is not a valid exercise of the police powers of the City.
The restrictions on the parking and storage of vehicles contained in
proposed Code Section 1045 should not be construed by a court to be a taking of
property. According to the test announced by the United States Supreme Code, an
action is not a taking if it substantially advances a legitimate state interest. In
addition, Minnesota courts have held that city actions taken as part of a
comprehensive land use plan are only unconstitutional takings if the owner of the
property affected has been denied all reasonable uses of his property. Code Section
1045 does not deny Edina residents all reasonable uses of their property. The
primary purpose of residential property is to maintain a home in which to live, not
to park or store vehicles such as boats and RV's.
Due process required by the United States and Minnesota Constitutions
requires that criminal statutes be sufficiently clear and definite to warn a person
about what conduct is punishable. The goal is to prevent arbitrary, standardless
DORSEY & WHITNEY
A PART.RSHIP INC -DIYU PROF-OKALC HATIONR
enforcement. If an ordinance of the City fails to meet this standard it is subject to
challenge as being unconstitutionally vague. Based on my review of Code Section
1045 it appears to be sufficiently dear and definite to warn a person as to what
conduct is punishable and therefore, should be upheld if challenged on the grounds
that it is, unconstitutionally vague.
-2-
DORSEY & WHITNEY
.1 1'. \HT \l�N6H1!' I \'('LUUI \O I'HOFP2C11O \AL lbil WMATIOYd
w91��r'U
oeA
>1 ch
. • ��'CbRpOR/•t�v
lose
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To. MAYOR AND COUNCIL
Agenda Item #
II
From: MARCELLA DAEHN, CLERK
Consent
❑
Information Only
IT
Date. JULY 16, 1992
Mgr-. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject. CODE COMMENTS
❑
To Council
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution.
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Info /Background
The attached copies of Code Comments have been received since the last Council
Meeting on July 6, 1992.
Rec
TO THE EDINA MAYOR AND CITE' COUNCIL:
the undersigned are opposed to the highly restrictive and unfair proposal to
Limit our right to park or store our boats, R.V.s, and other vehicles on our
own driveways i:i Edina. We respectfully request that you withdraw your support
for this proposal and leave the current ordinance in force.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
VAME
---//- ��--------------- •-------- - - - - --
(Alz
Af
ADDRESS
-------------------------------
Gum 9z0 - 3314
PHONE
%2d- 33 / �/-
jq ?a)
J AJL"7
C
9
J �LZ -'�- ++tam -C N E lx�
1vZ % ` ��•.�
N
jq ?a)
J AJL"7
CODE COMMENTS
5917 Grimes Ave., S.
Edina, MN 55424
July 12, 1992
Mayor. Fred Richards & City
Council Members.
Edina City Hall
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Mayor Fred. Richards and
City Council Members,
0
We appreciate the time and effort that has gone into public
hearings. and concern for individual opinions regarding city covenants.
We support the law as it stands regarding no obstructions
within 2 5 feet o f t h e . c u r b . We feel a 1 1 owing boats and campers to
occupy driveways and parking pads for undetermined lengths of.
time detracts from the beauty.of the neighborhood, is a safety
hazard, and has the potential to' devalue homes and neighborhoods.
Edina.is a special and well- regarded community where most
people take pride in ,their lawns, homes, and..streets. Let's keep
it that way.
Many people are concerned about where to park their boats
and RV's. A lot should be make available for Edina residents who
wish to use it for storing any such vehicles. Perhaps a task force
can be formed to look into the possibility. A letter to the
editor in theSun Currentsuggested this same idea several months
.ago. The proposed seas the Lewis Construction building on
Eden Avenue, across from Edina Recycling Center.
We are paying storage charges on two boats at the present
time and we would hope that the City Council would look into
options for an RV and.boat storage lot.
Sincerely,
Dawn & Steve Neumeyer
CODE COIDENTS
Lloyd C. Hanson
4513 Parkside LN
Edina, MN 55436 -1414
Telephone : ( 612 )929 -3772
13 July 1992
Edina Mayor: Fred Richards
Council Members: Peggy Kelly, Jane Paulus, Jack Rice, Glen Smith
I am highly opposed to the restrictive and unfair- proposal
to limi.� our right to park or store our boats, RV's, and other
vehicles on our own driveways /property in Edina. I respectfully
request that you withdraw your support for this proposal and
leave the current ordinance in force.
Furthermore, these vehicles are-purchased (in some cases, at
considerable expense) to give the owners the inalienable right of
pleasure. This proposal, if enacted, would force the owners to.
park /store their- vehicles at some remote area for a fee, which
nany cannot afford, or sell their vehicle, thus depriving them of
their inalienable right.
I, myself, and my wife, are retired on a fixed income, and
purchased an RV we could afford so we could enjoy traveling
around the country at z reasonable expense. We, and many others,
cannot get our RV's in our }rack yard or in our garage, nor can we
afford to park them elsewhere. also, when an RV is parked
elsewhere, too many.people know when you are not at home,
thereby, leaving one's home open for burglary and /or vandalism.
This proposal, if enacted, :should include trucks, vehicles
with advertising /logos, vehicles with Dealer's plates, and
unsightly vehicles. (Who is the judge for unsightliness?)
This proposal states that the vehicle must be owned or
leased by the property owner. What if the property owner has a
visitor with an RV? - - tell the visitor to park his /her vehicle
elsewhere? What is this world coming to? This is the USA, not
USSR!
This proposal reminds me of an analogy: A group of people
begin playing a game. As the game proceeds, someone wants to
change the rules.
So, if this ordinance were in effect when I purchased my
property over 24 years ago, I would have to abide by it.
However, . -since it was not in effect then, and the lack of it
causes: no hardship on my neighbors, no unhealthy conditions., no
nuisance, no affect on the welfare of the community, I do not
feel that it would be fair or even justifiable to enact it.
Also, I believe, that this proposal must be enacted only by
a referendum, duly explained in full to all the effected
residents. I do not believe a trimmed -down version placed in the
Edina Sun satisfies this criteria. Just how many Edina residents
get or even read the Sun?
Finally, Edina is NOT a Country Club, though many people try
to get the world to think so!
;Sin re ,
to C. Hanson
CODE COIMENTS
ow
. . . . ..........
67
-ZA2
0 -
Vj
CODE COMMENTS
-2/
I.
m
"AM
m
v-�
U I
JWALD H. RICHARDSON
7501 GLEASON ROAD
0
o
I.
m
"AM
m
v-�
U I
JWALD H. RICHARDSON
7501 GLEASON ROAD
7�ls�tiL
i
"jp-
CODE COMMENTS
Wis.
0% 1% '
L�+ic
�� � �
-
��
-'__-----____- -_ ___-_----_- _-__---_--_-`--_-
�z
'_-� ��� _--_
'
�����---_-- �_-_____-' ---___-- _-_'--_
'
'
__
��'.� ` �
` �����-_ �_-'__^-_�--_ _-__-'__'__-_----_-_-
`
-��-������� . ----
, -�
`�
_'---_-��_.-----_-_-_--'_- _--_--_---�_--__--__-'
--�_----_-_'_`� ___--, _---_-�--_�----__���_-_�-_-
. �
`
`
.
`
`
`
`
J
CODE COPENTS
RANDALL T. SKAAR
THOMAS W. RICHARDS
July 7, 1992,
SKAAR & RICHARDS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
205 CENTRAL AVENUE -- BUFFALO, MINNESOTA 55313
(612) 682 -4306
Metro: 16121 332 -5370
Fax: (6121 682 -6772
Fred Richards
Mayor of Edina
Edina City Hall
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
RE: Proposed New Recreational Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Mayor Richards:
MINNEAPOLIS OFFICE
OAKWOOD PROFESSIONAL BUILDING
10750 OLD COUNTY ROAD 15
PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55441
16121 332 -5370
This office represents Mr. and Mrs. Mack Daoud of
Edina, and they have asked me to write you to represent
their opinion concerning the proposed new recreational
vehicle ordinance which is more restrictive than the one
that is now in place.
My clients do feel that the current recreational.
vehicle ordinance regarding parking a recreational vehicle a
certain distance from the street'is restrictive enough and
already intrudes enough on their quiet enjoyment and use of
their property, and they believe that anything more
restrictive, that is, requiring them to be parked on the
side yards, may cause .hardship for many lot owners who do
not have sufficient side yard setback to park their
vehicles.
It is my clients' wish that the City make an informed
decision regarding the recreational vehicle ordinance and
not intrude unnecessarily on the constitutional rights of
the citizens of Edina and the quiet use and enjoyment of
their property.
My clients wish you to accept this letter as a voice
against any modification of the current recreational vehicle
parking ordinance in effect An the City of Edina.
Yours very truly,
SKAAR & RICHARDS, P.A.
Randall T. Skaar
RTS : C,
:�
cc: Mack Daoud
CODE COMMENTS
5501 Oaklawn Ave.
Edina MN 55424
July 6, 1992
Edina City Council
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina MN 55424
Dear Councilmembers,
I am writing to you about the R.V. parking issue.
I do not like R.V.'s being parked in people's driveways. My neighbor
has an R.V. parked in the driveway. When I look around at the houses
and then look at the R.V. it looks out of place because it is so
big.
I think R.V.'s should be hidden somehow. Maybe they could be parked
in their owner's back yard or side yard behind a fence instead of the
driveway. I think it would make neighborhoods look neater if the
owners would do this.
Please concider these ideas when you reveiw this issue.
Sincerely,
4zp
Austin Weigel
CODE COMMENTS
John C. McConneloug
Management Consulting
7201 York Avenue South * 713
July 2, 1992 Edina, MN 55435
Edina City Council
Edina City Hall
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
RE: Code Comments
Dear Council Members:
My wife and I ask your assistance in righting a wrong. We
refer to the fairly.recent ordinance that now prohibits the
use of barbecue equipment in all apartment buildings.
Since 1969, when we moved back to Minnesota and bought a
home in Edina, we have been ardent and vocal supporters of
our community, its employees and elected officials. The
city's services are superlative and the wisdom of our
settling in Edina has been proven repeatedly.
However, the ordinance referred to is an aberration and is
not consistent with Edina's normally well- reasoned approach.
It appears to be a non - sequitur reaction to some serious
apartment fires in nearby communities. However, in every
instance the problem arose because the buildings and
balconies involved were wooden structures.
We live in the Durham Apartments on York Avenue. This.
building and its balconies consist of steel girders, brick
and concrete. The risk of a barbecue fire in such a
structure is as remote as the ignition of a rock submerged
in water. We believe the code should identify the
differences in construction and permit residents in our and
similarly constructed apartment buildings to enjoy one of
the most appealing amenities of an Edina summer. We feel we
are now being needlessly penalized.
To retain the present.ordinance without change must be
viewed as an illogical knee -jerk action based on inertia and
mere administrative simplicity. We realize that this topic,
is not at the top of your agenda, but take the few moments
necessary for reason to prevail. Then act to still the
anguished and righteous cries of.the many deserving yet
deprived constituents.
Please rectify this inequity by amending this ordinance.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
iohn McConneloug
CODE COMMENTS
We owned a large mo'torhome for many years and stored it in
our _ -on -i n -law ` s hander. r=after- he sold his business we had
_t difficult time tinding a place to keep it _end ended by
storing it in Woodbury. This was so inconvienient, we sold
it and tried to get along without an RV, although it was our
+avori to mode of travel.
We took: a vacation in our car and I became i l l with the
shingles while in Mobile, Alabama. I shall never- forget
that trip home curled up in the czar wishing I could lie down
and have the convieniences of the RV.
Next year when I was well,
which would comply with all
have had it for two summers
two retired people. I•.aefore
if he cared if we par red it
would be fine:,.
oe decided to buy a small RV
the ordinances of Edina. We
and it is just what: we enjoy for
buying-it we asked our neighbor
on our driveway and he said that
Nowt, af t'.er .living in this home for over twenty - eight. year's,
and trying to be good citizens, voting for school
i mprovments although our children have been adults for many
years, and paying e=ver- higher tames, we are threatened with
an ordnance which ch says we can no longer have our RV. Do you
people who make_ these laws know what it means to be retired
and live on an income which keeps shrinking because of low
interest rates and ever increasing prices There are two
choices we would have. Sell the RV or pay a thousand
dollars a year to have it kept in a place where we hope it
will not be vandalized.
1 have a brother who lives i n Naples, Florida. They have an
ordinance much like the one you are trying to dictate to us.
When we visited them, the city made us feel very unwelcome.
We had to pay to keep the RV at a campground fifteen miles
away and have my brother come to get us. All I could think
was l "WHAT SNOBS!
!
We have friends who visit us who come in a camper. What
shall we say to them when next time they come? ":stay away
from Edina. You're not welcome! We are a group o+ snobs who
!-gut personal appearance above all else. We are like a
perfectly groomed woman who can't hold a child on her lap
lest she become mussed up. We have ..lost the common touch.
We cant people to judge ur_,: only by outward appearance'''
Use don't like the idea of selling our biome to move where RVs
are welcome. Please 'think of this before you take .-away our
right to use our own driveway. Let freedom ring!
Sincerely,
CODE CMIENTS
6128 Scotia Drive
Edina, Minnesota 55439
July 17th, 1992
Mr. Hughes / Edina City Council
City of Edina
Edina, Minnesota
SUBJECT: Motorhome Ordinance
Dear Mr. Hughes:
As the owner of a Winnebago Motorhome, I have been most concerned about the
new Edina ordinance.
In my case, I built a storage building at Brainerd specifically for that unit,
but on occassion I do bring the unit to my Edina home the week prior to travel-
ing with the unit. As explained to me, the seven consecutive day period does
make sense for interim permissible storage /parking.
I do concurr, that if a boat, trailer, or motorhome were to be parked in front
of every home, that there is a loss of property value and.more specifically,
it looks messy.
Than as a council and as a city for adopting a reasonable ordinance.
erely,
eor e . Lang
GML/ jmc
CODE COMMENTS
July 17, 1992
Mr. Fred Richards Mayor
Edina City Hall
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, Minn. 55424
Dear Sir;
I have lived in Edina since 1964 and am very proud of
our city. I try to work hard to keep it a good place to live.
People also work hard to have toys to play with in their
leisure time. To ban an R.V. or boat from your own home is
ridiculous. This proposal should not be approved.
yours truly,
Duane & Mavis Timerson
4624 Valley View Road
Edina, Minn. 55424
9
,i
!/GR
7- ,I-o - "9�
CODE COIOIENTS
74/.,t.6" Gite. -, ,, PN .
1 CODE COMMENTS
July 20, 1992
The Honorable Mayor
Frederick S. Richards
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Reference: Section 1045 - Parking /Storage .
Proposed Ordinance Modification
It is amazing that in visiting with neighbors and friends that conversations
evolves to what is going on at "City Hall ". Obviously we discuss the refer-
enced ordinance change and I would like to pass on certain comments that
have to be of interest to you, "Our elected officials ".
*Item - City Hall wants to develop a sterile, plastic community, not
the mix of other communities. "If you don't fit our criteria, why are
you here" attitude.
*Item - Country Club mentality/ attitude. If you can't do me any good,
"I have no use for you or you in our community".
Common folks enjoy the outdoors - fishing, boating, hunting, camping,
not necessarily on their yachts on Minnetonka or the river, but true
water and camping people. Case in point, an owner of a prKUp /camper-
type vehicle can park alongside a rig valued at half a million dollars
and get along famously, like real people, a comfortable fit, like an
old shoe.
*Item - Senior citizens, no longer capable physically or financially to
make the golf club set. Their last source of entertainment/ recreation
is their camping/ boating equipment. Limited real estate configuration
prevents parking their units other than on their driveways. Now you
want to deprive them of that. Is the intent to limit the population
in Edina of these unfortunate citizens that have helped build and support
the community all these years. Wonderful treatment.
One lady, almost in tears, said that after all these years, if the ordinance
is passed, they would have to dispose of their camper because their
real estate was such that the unit could not be parked on the rear
or side of their home. They have checked and found they cannot afford
to pay storage costs for their unit, so that means they would no longer
be able to enjoy their Senior Years traveling. Hotel costs and "eat -
out meals" are not possible for all retired, fixed - income folks.
*Item - Visitors not welcome. We apparently are so sophisticated that
we would rather not have the riff -raff recreational vehicle owners from
Page 2
"out -of- town" come to our community, and if they do, make it a short
stay. Again, it creates a very sincere hardship on your constituents
that have guests desiring to park at their hosts place for any period
exceeding the proposed 7 days.... hardly time t6 park, park, get reacquainted
and move on. Lets face up to certain facts, we ALL cannot pay our
guests to stay for 10 days or 2 weeks at the Embassy Suites Hotel.
Besides expensive, it is very inconvenient and cumbersome. Lets have
a bit of compassion for our citizens and encourage "out -of -town visitors".
Many of us are still proud of Edina even though it has a very strong
reputation of being very "snooty and upish" not for the run of the
mill, average people. I resent this attitude and let people know there
still are some real people living here despite the arrogance implied by
some.
*Item - My daughter lives in California and has told about certain situations
where various communities are very glad to have cooperated with recreational
vehicle owners. In cases of catastropies in the California earthquake,
volunteers to submit their vehicles for emergency use. Many have.
generators for developing electricity, many carry standby water and
sanitary facilities, radio communication capabilities and many other amenities
and functions that bode well in these situations. I know we don't have
quakes, but we do experience tornadoes and the freak accident that
recently. required a mass evacuation of the Duluth- Superior area. So,
yes, it can happen here and it would seem to me the city would appreciate
this potential standby of emergency equipment.
*Item - This brings me up to date on my attitude of your ordinance.
On June 23, 1992, I wrote your office requesting your interpretation
of the four issues, "peace, health, safety and welfare ". I would like
an explanation how a boat or recreational vehicle is conducive to violating
any of these items. I still have had no response.
*Item - The Star - Tribune, Sunday, July 5, 1992, page 17A, - "Wave
The Flag For A Welcome High Court Ruling On Property Rights ", by
George F.. Will, Washington Post. If you did not read the article, I'd
suggest you review same. It treats and addresses the issue we are
facing here., only on a larger scale. However, when the Edina owners
unite the cause, it too may become a sizable issue.
My understanding is that elected officials represent their constituants and.
do not necessarily represent only their own biased opinion. I have personally
sat in on many other council meetings where the council had a personal opinion
that was. in conflict with their constituants and their expressed desires. As
I recall, their constituants desires dictated the outcome.
Page 3
This is a major issue to be resolved and not just some whim to generate
problems. To add a commission in these times of fiscal problems and high
taxes is not good management, to use the police to enforce this rediculous
ordinance is beyond belief when all police departments are over loaded, and
if your police staff is not overloaded, I'd suggest we look at that item in
the upcoming budget.
I appreciate your time and consideration and request that you vote your
conscience -- against the proposed ordinance and vote in favor of maintaining
the current status.
T k you,
mad A. tordahl
6300 Virginia Ave. So.
Edina, MN 55424
cc: Peggy Kelly
Jane L. Paulus
Bernard. G. Rice, Jr.
Glenn Smith
vbave the f ag for a welcome hogh
court ruling on prop erty rights
By George F. Will
The Washington. Post
Washington
This Fourth of July weekend, as usu-
al — but a bit more securely than
usual — we can enjoy the American
essentials: baseball, hot dogs, apple
pie and property rights. Which is to
say, we can pursue happiness, which
involves a protected sphere of priva-
cv.
The hullabaloo about the Supreme
Court's recent abortion ruling ob-
scured another ruling concerning pri-
vacy. The day the court affirmed the
27- year -add "privacy right," of which
the abortion right is a subsidiary, the
coprt, in another case, strengthened
the right that is most important for
the protection of privacy — the right
to private property.
r
In' 1986 David Lucas, a developer of
abortion litigation is a striking in-
stance of a right unmentioned in the
Constitution but enforced by judges.
The property right is less exotic than
that "privacy right." It involves no
--manating penumbras. But it does
have one modest advantage: The
Constitution mentions it. And it is a
bulwark of privacy. Here is why.
John Locke, one of the intellectual
iources of our freedom. argued that
property rights (which he defined to
include "lives, liberties and estates ")
exist prior to, hence independent of
government. Preservation of these
rights is "the great and chief end" for
which governments are founded.
Locke's idea — property rights are
the basis of governments ansing
from consent — was repeated in the
Declaration of Independence, which
says men are "endowed" with in-
alienable rights. And "to secure these
residential properties, paid $975,000
for two lots on a South Carolina
island. He planned to build two
houses, one for sale, one for himself.
But in 1988 South Carolina enacted a
law banning all building on land sub-
ject to erosion. This instantly de-
stroyed the economic value of Lucas'
land. He sued, saying that the state's
action constituted a "taking" under
the Fifth Amendment which says
Property shall not "be taken for pub-
lic use without just compensation."
The trial court agreed, awarding him
$1.2 million.
However, the state's highest court
said no compensation is owed, re-
gardless of the effect of a state's ac-
tion on a property's value, when the
action is designed to prevent harmful
use of the property. Now the Su-
preme Court has ruled, 6 -3, that
South Carolina must compensate Lu-
cas unless it can show that restraints
on his property were implicit in laws
rights, governments are instituted"
which derive their "just powers from
the consent of the governed. ".But by
1787 delegates to the Constitutional
Convention had seen dismaying in-
stances of state governments attack-
ing property rights. The attacks in-
cluded devaluation of debts by the
promiscuous issuing of paper money.
So the convention designed a govern-
ment the structure of which — prin-
cipally, the separation of powers —
would impede attacks on property
rights (as well as on all other rights)
by capricious majorities. Next, in ful-
tiIlment of promises made to encour-
age states to ratify the Constitution,
the first Congress initiated the Bill of
Rights, with the Fifth Amendment
protection of property.
Property provides a sphere of person-
al sovereignty, a zone of indepen-
dence and privacy into which gov-
ernment should be able to intrude
Star Tribune
slKay
existing when he bought it. The court
ruled this way only because it accept-
ed the lower court's judgment that
Lucas' property had been rendered
altogether valueless. Still, this ruling
is a modest enhancement of a real, as
distinct from the ersatz, basis of the
Constitution's protection of privacy.
The ersatz basis was announced in
1965, when the court, offended by an
offensive Connecticut law restricting
access to birth control, looked
around for a way to call the law
unconstitutional. The court declare,'
that the law violated a hitherto unno-
ticed privacy right. The Constitution
mentions no such right, but the court
said the right was part of "penum-
bras. formed by emanations" from
the Bill of Rights.
Eight years later the court discovered
that this particular penumbra ema-
nated a right to abortion. The post -
1965 eareer of the "privacy right" in
only with difficulty, and only so far.
Surrounded by the rubble of Socialist
regimes, we seek the lessons of this
century. One is this: There is an
indissoluble connection between pri-
vate property and individual free-
dom. Our Founders said as much.
But nations can forget or neglect any
truth. That is why the Supreme
Court's ruling in the South Carolina
case is a welcome buttressing of the
basis of individual independence. It
serves the real constitutional value of
privacy by inhibiting government in-
fringements of property rights.
Government is not yet inhibited
enough. Arguably, it should be re-
quired to compensate property own-
ers when its actions directly and sub-
stantially diminish the value of prop-
erty. But even though the decision in
the South Carolina case was not a
noisy firecracker, it was a sparkler
worth waving on Independence Day,
A
Helen McClelland
5717 Continental Drive
Edina, MN 55436
July 17, 1992
CODE COMMENTS
Before the. Council votes' on the final wording in the
recodification of the Edina Ordinance, I wish to raise some
concerns that have surfaced regarding the definition of
"neighborhood ".
Prior to the Berenberg lawsuit, most of us on the Commission
had little trouble with the concept of "character and symmetry" of
the neighborhood. In fact, it was the consistent manner with which
all proponents /developers had been treated over the years which led
the court /judge, after much waffling, to find in favor of the city.
Yet, since we have all made attempts to contribute to a legal
definition of neighborhood, the system is not working as well as it
did previously. The Commission has sustained a series of 5 -4
votes. Some developers have learned to manipulate the ordinance to
a fine line. They openly state that they prefer Edina's ordinance,
because they can "tailor" their developments to meet it. They then
almost challenge the Commission to tinker /tamper with their plans.
The inference being - you can't make me do. more than your ordinance
demands.
As hard as everyone labored to produce the definition of
"neighborhood ", the current concept is not working much of the
time. (I wish to state in advance that I support and prefer the
figure.of 500 feet for purposes of NOTICE. People like to know,
and are entitled to know, about proposed changes in their.
neighborhood.) However, the measurement of 500 feet as a RADIUS
from the affected site often bears as little resemblance to
"neighborhood" as do the national boundaries of Africa to the
various tribes contained, divided, or sundered within.
Edina has always prided itself on the number and diversity of
its neighborhoods. But some are as tiny as one to three blocks.
Others may be as large as some of Dewey Hills areas. Using-the
fixed 500 foot radius has given rise to several problems. The. most
ludicrous example falls on those areas adjacent to Highway 100.
(Josephine, Tingdale, Nob Hill subdivision). The 500 foot radius
often includes lots on the opposite side of the freeway. The idea
that two areas separated by a major freeways are connected or share
a "neighborhood" or style is patently false.
Another example: Character and symmetry of a neighborhood may
be delineated by geographical or topographical features as opposed
to a circle drawn by a compass on a map. The recent subdivisions
on a through lot fronting on Dakota Trail illustrates this point.
In this case, the "neighborhood" was or should have been a heavily
wooded ridge with steep slopes - a "neighborhood" in itself.which
bordered two other neighborhoods. East, on Dakota Trail, were
large lots with mature trees, fairly similar to the original site.
But west, on Mohawk Trail, the land was flat, the trees mostly cut
down, the lots much smaller. Yet all were lumped together as one
neighborhood.
An analogous situation arises in Rolling Green. The 500 foot
circle only could the concept of neighborhood here. In the center
of Rolling Green appears an "island" of land with 10 -12 very large
lots and homes. Across the road, the houses and lots are
considerably reduced. One' more street away, and. the homes are
quite small,.particularly when compared to the "island ". But the
500 foot circle includes them all. As more and more smaller homes
enter the "average lot size ", the average required lot size
diminishes each time thus allowing more and more lot division. The
original developer's concept of the "island" as a showpiece gets
lost, as does the diversity that once existed in the area. Similar
to Rolling Green is the Wexford, Antrim, Tralee area of the city.
The lots here are large due to the steep slopes and
trees /vegetation. But under the current definition of
"neighborhood" this is another. area at risk of losing its basis
character, identity and diversity. A 500 foot circle would have to
include many much smaller homes, thus lowering the required lot
size a developer must meet for approval.
In contrast to some of these large or topographical areas,
Edina also possesses pocket neighborhoods - sometimes delineated by
the geography of water bodies or parks - which are overwhelmed by
the 500 foot radius concept. Examples of these areas are Schaefer
Circle, Goya Lane, Richwood Drive, Brookview Avenue (near 62),
Edina Court, Edgebrook Place, Etc.
There are two reasons for writing this letter at this time.
The primary reason is the fact that the City is in the process of
recodification and amendment. Second, the recent request for the
Dahlquist subdivision once again raised the problem of what.
constitutes a "neighborhood ". Schaefer represents a very unique
part of the city. The lots are very large, but not particularly
amenable to division. Most have large homes, but the homes are low
and rambling utilizing the width of the lot. Despite high property
taxes, buying and building rather than selling is currently
occurring. North of Schaefer Road is a neighborhood in.itself. It
bears little relation to the homes on Ridge Road and none at all to
Prescott Circle - north of Interlachen. But all.of these homes,
much smaller, are added into the calculation for average lot size
under the current definition of neighborhood. In this case, the
west side of Schaefer Road should be complementing only the east
side of Schaefer Road, with its lots of 120,000 square feet.
I wish to make clear that this letter represents my personal
I
thoughts. only; I am not speaking as a representative of the
Commission. But all of us have grumbled at one time or another
about the restraints this definition has imposed on our actions.
There appear to be two.factions - leading to those 5 -4 votes. One
which is very frustrated by the limitations which sometimes even
lead to a lack of common sense. logic.. The other faction is just as
uneasy with the definition, but figuratively shrugs their shoulders
and.say "we have no legal basis to stop /change this. The developer
has met the average lot size, width, depth and setbacks, etc,
therefore we cannot say no."
In an attempt to mitigate some-76f this confusion and
frustration, I would like to propose another definition of
neighborhood. I would like to separate the concept of NOTICE and
NEIGHBORHOOD.
Notice: Ord. 804, Section 10, Subparagraph 4. "The
applicant shall also give mailed notice to the
owners of all lots in the neighborhood to be
replaced by "within a 500. foot radius of the
perimeter" -- of the proposed plat or subdivision,
etc.
NEIGHBORHOOD: Ord 804, Section 2 (a) Definitions. A
neighborhood may be considered to be a unit as
small as the lots contained in one city /street
block or may be comprised of an area including
up to ten city blocks if the lots are of a
similar size with homes which are reasonably
close in range of size and value.
The following factors shall be used to delineate a
neighborhood.
1). The directional location of the area: Primary emphasis
shall be placed on the N -S axis, E -W axis, or the actual
street where the new plat or subdivision is to be
located.
2). Any geographic or topological features which enhance,
contribute to or delineate the area in a special way
shall receive equal emphasis.
Geographic may be park, water body, a cemetery, a cul -de-
sac, etc.
Topographic shall include steep slopes, rolling hills,
heavy timber, marsh, water, etc.
Special consideration may be given to preserve/ enhance
those characteristics or features resulting in conditions
to being imposed upon a developer /proponent.
3) A proposed plat or subdivision shall meet the established
criteria of the immediate neighborhood and shall not
substantially alter its character and symmetry.
4). The proposed plat /subdivision shall then .be considered in
relation to and its impact upon a second tier of lots
including the abutting rear yards. (A cul -de -sac shall
be deemed a neighborhood until step 1).
5) The proposed plat /subdivision shall be considered in its
entirety for its integration into the general community.
These are only proposals, of course. But they might resolve
some of the ambiguity coupled with rigidity under which we are now
working. There seems to be no flexibility for that special
situation or area anymore. Somehow - 500 feet, meet the rules,
rubber stamp. The neighbors and adjacent property owners get angry
and frustrated. They feel they have no say or say and then get
ignored. They are mostly right. They have no input. If the
proponent meets the exact criteria, he gets approval no matter what
they think. It is a tough situation. But please consider these
thoughts.
Sincerely,
Helen McClelland
Planning - Commission
712-0 If?- If
' b y qa� y 60-, h /'t -
TO THE EDINA MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
We the undersigned are opposed to the highly restri,ctive and unfair proposal to
limit our right to park or store our boats, R.V.s, and other vehicles on our
own driveways in Edina. We respectfully request that you withdraw your support
for this proposal and leave the current ordinance in force.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
NAME
------------------------- - - - - --
f� 1
ADDRESS PHONE #
------------------------- - - - - -- ----- - - - - --
62-33
6 :2-3 3
Sr.
6 z 0
9.- tl
V?
Cch CI DW—/ S a
z %
�v r�
Av4_
/ad
60,, -z S7
Sid
co1-. Z , ( .
&614 '41�
Sl Z y
Pa 3a
02'x. -=� Lu �S�R -� ►BLS- �..+�7
4 100
%O yN AA LA)
j,C
9C)- a 3�
9�0- Joao
9.2 '�F_ y�iy
%Zo -s(/66
',Y7,
9.- tl
V?
9ZZ-W 5/
j,C
9C)- a 3�
9�0- Joao
9.2 '�F_ y�iy
%Zo -s(/66
.5 ,,6 *1, t-, a 7 1J /?L
TO THE EDINA MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
We the undersigned are opposed to the highly restrictive and unfair proposal to
limit our right to park or store our boats,.R.V.s, and other vehicles on our
own driveways in Edina. We respectfully request that you withdraw your support
for this proposal and leave the current ordinance in force.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
NAME
ADDRESS PHONE #
- - - -- -ft ------------------------ ----- - - - - --
-1., i> > r- /,o-, - P!1
qe a m-6
1 / 1-
94;w 6--86 0 V
_t
�s
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: KENNETH ROSLAND Agenda Item I A
From: KRIS AAKER Consent
1
Information Only
Date. JULY 20, 19 9 2 Mgr. Recommends %, To HRA
Subject: S-92-1, PRELIMINARY n To Council
PLAT APPROVAL MARK
DAHLQUIST ADDITION Action Motion I
I
X Resolution
Ordinance
Discussion i
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission has recommended denial of the proposed five
lot preliminary plat.
INFO /BACKGROUND
See attached minutes and staff report.
The attached staff report takes the position that water area should
not be included in the determination of "lot depth ". Following
the Planning Commission meeting the proponent requested a
clarification of the meaning of lot depth by the City Attorney.
The attached opinion by the City Attorney finds that water area
within the boundaries of the lot should not be excluded from the
lot depth measurement. The result of this change is that all lots
now conform to the neighborhood median sizes and dimensions, and no
variances are requested. However, the proponents continue to
request a variance from the 100 foot easement required adjacent to
the two ponds.
DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 1992, 7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, G. Johnson, McClelland, Workinger,
Faust, Hale, Byron, Shaw, Runyan
MEMBERS ABSENT:. L. Johnson, Palmer, Ingwalson
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen
Jackie Hoogenakker
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Commissioner Byron moved approval of the May 27, 1992, meeting
minutes. Commissioner Hale seconded the motion. All voted aye;
motion carried.
II. NEW BUSINESS:
*agenda items were heard out of order
8 -92 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval. Mark Dahlquist Addition. Lot
11, Auditors Subdivision No. 325. CDS Partners.
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the subject property
measures approximately 10.5 acres in area, of which about four
acres is water in two ponds. There is a new home under
construction in the south- westerly corner of the property. The
applicants have submitted a subdivision. request which would create
four additional lots: The new lots would be served by the
extension and improvement of the right -of -way for Harold Woods
Lane. Mr. Larsen pointed out the fifth lot is served by a driveway
to Schaefer Road.
Mr. Larsen'asked the Commission to note that the 500 foot
"Neighborhood ", as provided for in the Subdivision Ordinance,
yields 60 lots.
Mr. Larsen stated all lots in the proposed subdivision exceed
the median lot area of the neighborhood on both a net or gross
basis. All lots in the proposed subdivision either meet or exceed
the median neighborhood lot width of 150 feet. Lots 1, & 2, meet or
exceed the neighborhood median lot depth. Lots 3, 4, and 5 do not
meet the lot depth requirement when the pond areas is excluded from
1
the measurement. Thus, lot depth variances are requested for lots
3, 4 and 5.
The Subdivision Ordinance requires, when property is platted,.
the granting of a 100 foot conservation easement covering land
adjacent to ponds and other water bodies. The proponents contend
that the combination of the 100 foot easement, the width of the
right -of -way, and normal front street setback would combine to
cause a hardship and create unreasonable constraints on development
of the property. They are requesting a variance to reduce the
conservation area to 50 feet.
Mr. Larsen explained the proposed subdivision requests two
types of variances. First, the lot depth variance for Lots 3, 4,
and 5. If you count lot area within the ponds the lots would
exceed the neighborhood standard, which, at 276 feet is a very
great depth. Mr. Larsen clarified.that staff took the position in
this instance to not include the water bodies when calculating lot
depth. He stated the actual zoning ordinance does not indicate
that water bodies must be excluded from lot depth calculations.
Continuing, Mr. Larsen said the actual land areas within these lots
is quite large. With the large lot widths they should handle large
houses and still maintain a desirable spacing between homes. The
second type of variance is the size of the conservation easement
imposed adjacent to the ponds. The .objective of the easement
requirement is to protect the flood capacity of water bodies and to
protect the natural condition near the shore line. In this case,
the land has not been left in a natural, wild condition. The
current owner maintains and mows the entire area and uses it as an
extension of this yard. The proposed 50 foot easement would
protect the flood capacity of the ponds and would provide an
adequate setback from the pond. The Commission will recall the
Wooddale Lakes 6 lot plat recently approved. The Commission and
Council approved the plat with a 50 foot conservation easement.
The DNR recommends 50 foot setbacks in this situation. Also, a
pending zoning ordinance amendment will.require a 50 foot setback
for this type of water body when no easement exists.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends preliminary plat
approval including lot depth variances and a modified easement with
the following conditions.
1. Final Plat approval
2. Subdivision Dedication
3. Developers Agreement
4. 50 foot conservation easement adjacent and upland from
each pond.
0. The proponents, Mr. Dahlquist, Mr. Clark, Mr. Schall, and Mr.
Gair, planning consultant were present.
Commissioner L. Johnson asked Mr. Larsen to clarify for him if
he excluded the ponds when he calculated lot area. Mr. Larsen said
he did exclude the ponds when calculating lot area and also
excluded the ponds when he calculated lot depth. Mr. Larsen said
the proposal presented by the developers this evening excluded the
ponds when they calculated lot area, but included the ponds when
they calculated lot depth. Mr. Larsen noted that the calculations
presented by the developers meet or exceed the neighborhood median.
.Mr. Larsen pointed out when the surveyor calculated lot depth,
area, and width for this site they employed the exact system when
they computed the calculations for the entire 500 foot
neighborhood. Mr. Larsen noted when he did his calculations he
chose to be conservative and excluded the ponds which resulted in
his calculations reflecting the need for lot depth variances.
Commissioner Shaw questioned Mr. Larsen on why the city
subdivision, ordinance stipulates an 100 foot easement around water
bodies, when within the city maintaining this easement appears
difficult. Mr. Larsen explained that the 100 foot easement dates
back over 20 years, and he is unsure why the 100 foot figure was
decided on.. He pointed out our requirement is larger than what the
DNR requires, and from previous subdivisions it appears the city is
moving toward maintaining standards as stipulated by the DNR. The
DNR requires a.50 foot setback from the southern pond and. the
northern pond does not require DNR standards, though they would
recommend that at least a 35 foot conservation be stipulated on the
northern pond.
Commissioner Hale asked why the conservation easement does not
follow the shoreline on Lot 3. He pointed out the north pond
appears to have a point in it that the developer does not recognize
as shoreline. Mr. Larsen explained that the shoreline has been
altered, and the shoreline according to. the developer is the
original shoreline.
Commissioner Byron asked what the setback is from the pond on
the new house being constructed. Mr. Schall responded the setback
of the new house from the pond is 100 feet.
An unidentified women interjected a question on how
construction of the new house along the southern border of the
subject property is possible before any hearings occurred. Mr.
Larsen explained to neighbors and commission members that the 10.5
acre lot is at present one buildable lot which would allow
construction of one house. The new house is not required to meet
subdivision standards because it is a legal buildable lot. The lot
has the required frontage on an improved street, and meets the
requirements of the city zoning ordinance. The requested
subdivision of,- the property is what triggers the subdivision
process and compliance.with it's requirements.
Chairman Johnson requested if neighbors desire to speak they
must state their name and address.
3
Mr. Dahlquist informed the Commission he has owned and
maintained the subject property for a number of years. He added
after considerable thought he decided to enter into a partnership
which would help with the development of the site. Mr. Dahlquist
said he feels the proposal that has been submitted to the
commission is a good one.. Continuing, Mr.'Dahlquist referred to
the question concerning the point in the northern pond explaining
during his walking on the property he noticed that the shoreline of
the northern pond did not look quite right. Mr. Dahlquist said he
reviewed a map and aerial of the. area at the University of
Minnesota library and an aerial of the site depicts. that that point
of the pond did not exist in 1940. Mr. Dahlquist explained that
it is his understanding that the Schaefers constructed, an
underground pumping system between the.north and south ponds as a
result of. the drought of the 19301s. Mr. Dahlquist reported at
this time the north pond contained vegetation, and the south pond
held water. An inlet on the north pond was constructed near the
pump so the suction pipe to the pump would be shorter. He told the
commission when considering the proposal the developer depicted the
original shore line of the north pond. Continuing, Mr. Dahlquist
said he bought the property his house is on in 1958 and constructed
his home in 1960, and while living and enjoying the area he felt a
desire to obtain the lot in question. Mr. Dahlquist explained the
lot in question was donated by Mrs. Schaefer to Gustavus Adolphus
College in St. Peter, and he approached the college to obtain this
property. Shortly thereafter, he obtained the property, and has
enjoyed it immensely over the years. Mr. Dahlquist concluded that
originally he was the "young kid" on the block, and now is the "old
kid on the block" and the time has come to develop this 10.5 acre
lot. He stated he has an emotional tie to the land, and it is very
important to him, and his wife, that any development be constructed
with sensitivity to the site.
Mr. Ted Robinson, 5021 Ridge Road asked Mr. Dahlquist if the
north pond has changed in the last 40 years. Mr. Dahlquist
responded that it has not.
Mr. Gair explained to the commission with graphics how he
obtained the calculations presented this evening. He pointed out
the "neighborhood" consists of 60 lots, and the lot in question is
almost bowl shaped containing wooded areas, slopes, four acres of
water with a flat area in the middle of the site. There is a 300
foot separation between the north and south pond. Mr. Gair pointed
out the access to the site is off Schaefer Road. He noted sanitary
sewer has been added to the site that extends easterly through the
property. He pointed out city water hookup was also installed to
accommodate future home sites. Mr. Gair said they are asking for
a variance from the subdivision ordinance to construct houses
within 50 feet of the ponds. Mr. Gair noted that a previous
subdivision, Wooddale Lakes received Council approval with
conservation easements 50 feet from the water bodies also.
4
Mr. Gair addressed the discrepancies in staff's interpretation
of the ordinance and the interpretation taken by the developer in
regards to lot area and lot depth. Mr. Gair read for the
commission and neighbors that part of the zoning ordinance as it
relates to lot depth, area, etc.. "Lot Depth: the horizontal
distance between the midpoint of the front lot line and the
midpoint of the rear lot line. The greater frontage of a corner
lot is its depth and the lesser frontage is its width ". "Lot
Area: The area within the lot lines exclusive. of land located
below the ordinary high water elevation of lakes, ponds, and
streams ". Mr. Gair said in his opinion the proposed plat meets the
standards stipulated in the ordinance.
.Commissioner McClelland questioned Mr. Clark on the footprints
depicted inquiring what is the approximate square footage of each
building pad. Mr. Clark responded the footprints illustrated are
between 2,300 and 2,500 square feet. He explained this would
create a two story home of approximately 4,500 square feet not
including the basement space. Commissioner McClelland pointed out
the new construction within the area, stating they all appear to
exceed 5,000 square feet, and some actually double that. She added
she is hesitant to believe the footprints as depicted will be the
true footprint.
Mr. Linborg, 5101 Ridge Road told the Commission he has a
problem with the inclusion of a number of smaller lots that are not
located immediately adjacent to the subject site. He added the
11500 foot neighborhood" may encompass too many lots and skew the
numbers. Mr. Larsen said any lot that is touched by the "line"
measuring 500 feet is included in the calculations.
Betsy Robinson, 5021 Ridge Road, asked if the calculations for
Lot 3 used the historic water line or used the water line as it is
today. Mr. Gair said when lot area was computed on Lot 3 the
historic water line was used. The lot area.is 35,992 square feet.
Ms. Robinson said in her opinion two lots do not meet neighborhood
standards, lots 3 and 4. Ms. Robinson questioned if any surveys
were done on the water area. Mr. Gair said surveys were done by
the DNR, Watershed, and a civil engineer, and, they found no
problems with the ponding as it relates to the proposal.
Mr. Manthy, 6413 Interlachen Boulevard, asked if the property
in question is in a floodzone. Mr. Larsen said the DNR established
that these ponds do not contain a flood elevation that affects the
property that would result in an inability to construct homes with
basements. Mr. Larsen explained the flood elevation was
established by the DNR at 940.7, and the basement elevations of the
proposed houses are in the 942 range.
Mr. Manthy asked Mr. Dahlquist how much of the subject
property is mowed. . Mr. Dahlquist said a large portion of the
property has been mowed and is located in an area between the two
F1
ponds. Mr. Manthy commented that he feels issues have not been
represented correctly. He noted the point on the pond on Lot.3 was
not included in the lot area calculations and indications that.Mr.
Dahlquist mows a large portion of the site is also misleading. Mr.
Dahlquist using graphics pointed out the areas he has maintained by
mowing. Mr. Manthy said he is not in favor of the city granting
variances from the subdivision ordinance requirement of maintaining
an '100 foot easement from the .ponds. Mr. Manthy remarked just
because other easement variances have been granted within the.city
it does not have to continue.. Mr. Dahlquist pointed out pertaining
to the ponds; the north pond is the first pond to dry up, and the -
point on that pond is very shallow, and is the first area that drys
up.
Ms. Robinson said that she feels something is not quite right
in granting variances on basements. Mr. Larsen clarified that
houses can be constructed on this site without a variance. The
variance that is requested is from the subdivision ordinance
requirement that an. 100 foot easement must be maintained around the
ponds.
- Mr. Mike Dunn, 5117 Schaefer Road told the commission that
what has been proposed appears to have a devious nature. He said
he objects to the exclusion.of the .point of the pond.
Mr. Jim Chafoulias, (owner of the house that is being
constructed directly across from the subject site on Schaefer Road)
told the,commission when he was looking for a site to construct a
new home he walked the subject site and felt that the site is large
enough to support at most, two houses. He concluded that four
houses in this area is way too much, and will not enhance the
neighborhood.
An unidentified man said he is very confused regarding the
discussion that has taken place - regarding Lot 3, the point in
question,. and setbacks. Mr. Larsen said that the ordinance at
present remains at 100 feet, recent history, shows we have granted
subdivision approval with a conservation easement of 50 feet. The
proposal in question reflects building pads 50 feet away from the
pond. In referring to the question of what is or is not the proper
water line of Lot,3 he stated he cannot respond to that.
Mr. Manthy advised the commission he approached the city
requesting a front yard setback variance on his property which was
ultimately denied. He explained it was very frustrating when staff
in the planning department informed him front yard setbacks are
strictly enforced, and they could not support his request. Mr.
Manthy said he also was told there must be a hardship to support
his request, and in his instance there was no hardship.. Mr. Larsen
responded that staff did recommend denial of the variance request.
He noted consistently the City of Edina has been very careful in
granting front yard setbacks, and have been very firm in
1i
maintaining the integrity of the streetscapes of it's
neighborhoods. Mr. Larsen reiterated that the variance requested
from the pond is a variance from the subdivision ordinance not the
.zoning ordinance, as in Mr. Manthy's case, which required review by
the Board of Appeals.
Mr. Howard Weiner, 5224 Schaefer Road told the Commission he
does not want to take issue with his neighbors adding he supports
the proposal as submitted and feels it is in keeping with the
neighborhood. He pointed out the new homes that .have been
constructed along Ridge Road do not contain overly large lots.
Mr. Clark said that 90% of the homes he constructs
are two story homes. He referred to a comment from Commissioner
McClelland regarding a concern she has that the proposed houses
will be larger than depicted on the site plan. Mr. Clark clarified
that a two story walkout home that contains a 2,500 square foot
footprint, and second story with the inclusion of the basement will
result in a house of approximately 6,500 square feet. Which by
most standards is a large house. Mr. Clark noted what we are
proposing along with the natural terrain and ponds creates more
spacing than what is present in much of the neighborhood. He
pointed out the ponds provides spacing creating an aesthetically
pleasing development.
Mr. Chafoulias asked Mr. Clark if he applied the 100 foot rule
would you still be.able to construct four homes. Mr. Clark said
you could construct four houses but they would be forced on the
site, and would not in his opinion 'be as appealing as the houses
positioned on site as proposed.
An unidentified man asked that a study be done of all homes
within the 500 foot neighborhood to see how far they are from the
ponds.
Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if he has the square
footage of the lots along Schaefer Road. Mr. Larsen said the
houses both on the east and west side of Schaefer Road contain lots
that are about 200 feet X 600 feet, and smaller lots going north
down Schaefer. He said there are around three lots within this
neighborhood that contain 3+ acres.
Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Clark if he is constructing
the Schall house. Mr. Clark responded he is constructing the
Schall house.
Commissioner McClelland said that again she feels the 500 foot
neighborhood encompasses two many lots. She said the houses along
Schaefer Road should be the determining factor. She added the lots -
on Ridge Road do not compare with the lots on Schaefer. She said
she cannot imagine overly large houses on these lots. Commissioner
McClelland said another concern of hers is that she does not
7
understand why the Schall house did not. have to comply with the
subdivision ordinance. Mr. Larsen reiterated that the entire 10.5
acre site is one lot, and when Mr. Schall applied for building
permit all that was required was compliance with our zoning
ordinance requirements. Mr. Larsen pointed.out the Galoub house
was constructed with these same guidelines. Commissioner
McClelland questioned if the same owner wants to.subdivide doesn't
he /she have to follow the subdivision rules. Mr. Larsen said he
cannot answer that question. He observed it is difficult in this
situation because the Schall house is not fully completed, and
subdivision has been requested.
Commissioner McClelland said she is very upset in granting
variances for new construction. She stressed if we have a
standard, lets keep with that standard. Commissioner McClelland
pointed out the wetlands are very precious, and must be protected.
She commented she has another problem with the DNR.only requiring
a 35 foot setback on the north pond. She cautioned that we as a
body must protect all our wetlands. Commissioner McClelland stated
another issue she is very concerned about is the square footage of
the proposed houses. She concluded in her opinion this site can
support two houses, not the proposed four houses, and any
development should follow the contour of the wetlands.
Commissioner Runyan said he disagrees with our ordinance that
when calculating lot area we do not include wetlands. He pointed
out the pond is still part of the property, it cannot be built on,
and in essence maintains the open space. Commissioner Runyan asked
Mr. Larsen why.calculating lot area does not include water. Mr.
Larsen said most zoning ordinances are written for dry high ground
pieces of property, that are usually rectangular in shape. Mr.
Larsen said that is usually is the scenario on which are
definitions are based. Mr. Larsen explained that what the our
ordinance concerning lot area wants to preserve is the ratio of
ground to the ratio of the house.
Commissioner Faust said the Wooddale Lakes subdivision does
not compare to this situation. She pointed out during that process
the commission trimmed down the lots from the originally proposed
eight lot subdivision to a six lot subdivision. She said this
reduction in lots created lots. compatible with those of the
neighborhood. Continuing, Commissioner Faust pointed out there
also was a hardship on that site because if the commission held
firm to the 100 foot easement there would be no buildable space.
The 100 foot rule was unreasonable on the Wooddale Lake site.
Commissioner Faust said the commission carefully created
guidelines, and she believes they should be adhered to.
Commissioner Runyan said he believes the days of the huge
estate lot, and the construction of extremely large houses are the
exception, not the rule, in Edina. He said the majority of the new
houses in Edina are being constructed within the 800 thousand to 1
8
million dollar range, not the 6 million dollar range as the house
next door carries, or the price of the overly large house across
the street carries. Commissioner McClelland said that while she
agrees with that, she pointed out at the house going up across the
street, noting that it appears within this neighborhood the norm
has been to construct a very large, expensive house.
Commissioner Byron said in examining the proposal the 60 lot
neighborhood contains only 15 lots that are less than 21,000 square
feet. He said this observation indicates that the lots within this
neighborhood are very large. Commissioner Byron said it is his
understanding that the ordinance is to be used as a guideline when
reviewing each case brought before us. Commissioner Byron added he
believes what the developer has presented meets the ordinance
guidelines, but in reviewing all information he believes that four
lots is too much for this site, and cannot support a four lot
subdivision.
Commissioner Workinger said in reviewing the proposal as
presented he was struck by the fact that we would be considering a
variance for this site because of the size of the lot. He said in
his opinion there is no hardship to support this request.
Commissioner Workinger noted that he cannot recommend where a house
should be placed but feels that 100 foot conservation easement
should be followed. Commissioner Workinger added that he feels the
size of the lots are adequate, but he cannot support this request
because of the magnitude of the variance.
Commissioner Shaw said she agrees, she cannot support. the
request for a variance.
Mr. Dahlquist explained that this property is already serviced
by water and sewer. He added the service is for six sites and he
feels the proposed four lot subdivision is very fair and
reasonable.
Commissioner McClelland pointed out the commission appears to
have a problem supporting this proposal when it requires variances.
She asked Mr. Clark if he would be interested it tabling the issue
allowing time to redesign or would he prefer a motion for denial.
Mr. Clark responded that he has spent considerable time on
this project and believes it is a good project that will be
developed 'with sensitivity. He said this site does contain a
hardship when the 100 foot easement is applied. Mr. Clark observed
that it is obvious that this site is marked for development, and he
respectively requested that the commission act on this issue.
Commissioner McClelland moved to recommend denial of the
proposal as submitted noting that denial is based on the large
request for_ variances, and due to our maintaining our current
ordinance requirement stipulating an 100 foot conservation easement
9
around bodies of water. Commissioner Faust seconded the motion,'
asking the commission to note that she is uneasy with the process,
it appears "fishy" with the construction of the house on Lot 1
(Schall house), not yet completed. Ayes, Faust,,Hale, Workinger,
McClelland, Byron, Shaw, G. Johnson. Nay, Runyan. Motion carried.
i
Z -9 2 ,
2\
Final Rezoning
R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District to PCD -1
Planned Commercial District, Durr, Ltd.
3916 -3918 West 44th Street
OF
Mr. La\re formed the Commission the City C ncil granted
preliminary ng to PCD -1 on June 3, 1991. Th proponent has
returned wi Development Plans and is reque Final Rezoning
approval.
Mr. Larsen exp-I
preliminary approval.
The necessary Compreh
1991. Second, a cons
landscaped area along
of Parking Agreement
use.
ined the Council atta
First, Amendment to
e ive Plan amendment
e tion easement to
the esterly properj�
prov ing for Ci
'three conditions to
Comprehensive Plan.
approved on June 3,..
:ct the 10 foot wide
Finally, a Proof
of any change in
V line.
review
Mr. Larsen pointed out the Ainal Development Plans are
consistent with plans given pre 'm' ary approval by the Commission
and Council last June.
Mr. Larsen con/Reded p po \thee e identical to those
given preliminary aff Final Rezoning with
the following cond
1. Executed ed Prng Agreement.
2. Conservaent overly 10 feet of the
site.
Commissioner said s from the plans
presented that the has me ns recommended by
city council. `
Commissione Workinger questioned when work uld commence.
Mr. Larsen res nded that he is not sure when work will commence
and added if ey do not act within three years the proposal may
have to be r Bard.
Commi -Vioner Faust moved to recommend Final Rezoning subject
10
RON C]
CONSTRUCT
June 12, 1992
5114 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD. / EDINA, MN 55439 612/831 -2225
Hr. Jerome P. Gilligan
City Attorney
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street _
Edina, HN 55424
h
Res Pr posed Single Family Subdivision
Dalquist Property /Schaefer Road
Dear Hr. Gilligan:
Relative to this proposed single family subdivision, I am writing to
request your assistance and interpretation of Edina's current
ordinance which regulates plats and subdivisions. Hore specifically
in our measurements of lot depths we have included ponding areas
since the ordinance defines depth as being from the front lot line
to the rear lot line with no reference to deleting ponds or water
areas.
I would appreciate your opinion on this matter as to whether we can
include the ponds in the lot depth dimension. Thank you for your
assistance.
Sincerely,
i
Ronald E. Clark
REC /cw
LOC.A.TI.ON: MAP
T It
1/ATERM AN sv
LL
E-N BURG.
'
K i e W
.
MT It LRCM
I
O �
Q
i
HAROLD WOODS
r —i u
APPi[
Y �
at
IW� .
V
O ii `
� A p
d _ McStroo
T
r, ' W WOOD t 0 {JR T
I
7 I I
� Q x
SUBDIVISION
NUMBER S -92 -1
L 0 C A T 10 N Lot 11, Auditors Subdivision No. 325
REQUEST Create four new lots
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
4-
I
i
1.. u
im
EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 27, 1992
STAFF REPORT
8 -92 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval. Mark Dahlquist
Addition. Lot 11, Auditors Subdivision No.
325. CDS Partners.
The subject property measures approximately. 10.5 acres in
area, of which about four acres is water in two ponds. There is a
new home under ..construction in the south - westerly corner of the
property. The applicants have submitted a subdivision request
which would create four additional lots. The new lots would be
served by the extension and improvement of the right -of -way for
Harold Woods Lane. The fifth lot (Lot 1) is served by a driveway
to Schaefer Road.
The 500 foot "Neighborhood ", as provided for in the
Subdivision Ordinance, yields 60 lots. The median size of
dimensions of those lots are:
500 FOOT NEIGHBORHOOD
*Net, excluding water
All lots in the proposal subdivision exceed the median lot
area of the neighborhood on both a net of gross basis. All lots in
the proposed subdivision either. meet or exceed the median
LOT
WIDTH
LOT
DEPTH
LOT AREA
150
FEET
276
FEET
33,325 SQ.
FT.
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION
NET
LOT
WIDTH
LOT
DEPTH
LOT AREA
LOT
1
320
FEET
640
FEET
99,637 SQ.
FT.
LOT
2
150
FEET
280
FEET
54,285 SQ.
FT.
LOT
3
225
FEET
255
FEET
35,992 SQ.
FT.
LOT
4
195
FEET
270
(175 *)
33,501 SQ.
FT.
LOT
5
215
FEET
340
(190 *)
35,001 SQ.
FT.
*Net, excluding water
All lots in the proposal subdivision exceed the median lot
area of the neighborhood on both a net of gross basis. All lots in
the proposed subdivision either. meet or exceed the median
neighborhood lot width of 150 feet. Lots 1, & 2, meet or exceed the
neighborhood median lot depth. Lots 3, 4, and 5 do not meet.the
lot depth requirement when the pond areas is excluded from the
measurement. Thus, lot depth variances are requested for lots 3,
4 and 5.
The Subdivision Ordinance requires, when property is platted,
the granting of a 100 foot conservation easement covering land
adjacent to ponds and other water bodies. The proposed preliminary
plat illustrates the effect of this easement. The proponents
contend that the combination of the 100 foot easement, the width of
the right -.of -way and normal front street setback would combine to
cause a hardship and create unreasonable constraints on development
of the property.. They are requesting a variance to reduce the
conservation area to 50 feet. Attached. to this report is an
explanation of the variance request submitted by the proponents.
Recommendation
The proposed subdivision requests two types of variances.
First, the lot depth variance for Lots 3, 4, and 5. If you count
lot area within the ponds the lots would exceed the neighborhood
standard, which, at 276 feet is a very great depth. The actual
land areas, within these lots is quite large. With the large lot
widths they should handle large houses and still maintain a
desirable spacing between homes. The second type of variance is
the size of the conservation easement imposed adjacent to the
ponds. The objective of the easement requirement is to protect the
flood capacity of water bodies and to protect the natural condition
near the shore line. In this case, the land has not been left in
a natural, wild condition. The-current owners maintain and mows
the entire area and uses it as an extension of their yard. The
proposed 50 foot easement would protect the flood capacity of the
ponds and would provide an adequate setback from the pond. The
Commission will recall the Wooddale- Lakes 6 lot plat recently
approved.. The Commission and Council approved the plat with a 50
foot conservation easement. The DNR recommends 50 foot setbacks in
this situation. Also, a pending zoning ordinance amendment will
require a.50 foot setback for this type of water body when no
easement exists.
. Based on the foregoing, reasons staff recommends preliminary
plat approval including lot depth variances and a modified easement
with the following conditions..
1. Final Plat approval
2. Subdivision Dedication
3. Developers Agreement
4. 50 foot conservation easement adjacent and upland from
each pond.
Tj 6 IfIM A r. F
wAkbi.
7J'I
PP
powb
W
Y/
. .. ......
POND
l 1 :r
PRELIMINARY UTILITIP-6 PLAN
MARK DA14LOUIST ADDITION 1:41 C016 PARTNERS
NORTFI
350 PARK AVENUE
NEW YORK. NEW YOBS 10022
(212)415-9200
1330 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N. W.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036
(202)857 -0700
3 ORACECHURCH STREET
LONDON BC3V OAT, ENGLAND
44 -71- 929 -3334
36. BUR TRONCHET
75009 PARIS, PRANCE
33- 1-42-66-59-49
35 SQUARE DE MEEUS
B -1040 BRUSSELS, BELGIUM
32- 2-504-46-L
l
Mr. Kenneth Rosland
City Manager
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
DORSEY & WHITNEY
A Pssrt naniv Iwaan P-3X0— COeeo ONs
2200 FIRST BANK PLACE EAST
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1498
612) 340-2600
TELEX 29-0605
FAX 612)340 -2868
AM ME P. GIIldGAN
(612) 340.2M
July 15,1992
Re: Proposed Mark Dahlquist Addition Subdivision
Dear Mr. Rosland:
201 FIRST AVENUE, S. W., SUITE 340
ROCHESTER, MINNBSOTA 55902
(507)288 -3156
1200 FIRST INTERSTATE CENTER
BILLINGS. MONTANA 59103
(406)252 -3800
507 DAVIDSON BUILDING
GREAT FALLS, MONTANA 59401
(406)727 -3632
127 EAST FRONT STREET
MISSOULA, MONTANA 59802
(406)721 -6025
801 GRAND, SUITE 3900
DES MOINES, IOWA 50309
(515) 283 -1000
The City has received a subdivision request for Lot 11, Auditors
Subdivision No. 325, which is referred to as the Mark Dahlquist Addition. The
subdivision request would create four additional lots. The subject property
measures approximately 10.5 acres in area, of which about four acres are covered by
ponds. Our opinion has been requested as to whether ponds or water areas are
excluded. in determining lot depths under the City of Edina's Subdivision and
Zoning Ordinance (Ordinances No. 804 and 825). If ponds or water areas are
excluded, 'the lot depth on three of the lots in the proposed subdivision would not
meet the requirements of the Ordinances.
For purposes of the City's Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances "Lot
Depth" is defined as follows:
" "Lot Depth" The horizontal distance between the
midpoint of the front lot line and the midpoint of the rear
lot line. The greater frontage of a corner lot is its depth
and the lesser frontage is its width."
For purposes of determining "Lot Depth" the front lot line is the boundary of a lot
having frontage on the street, and the rear lot line is the boundary of a lot which is
most distant from, and approximately parallel with, the front lot line. This
definition of Lot Depth and the other provisions of the Ordinances do not exclude
DOBSEY & WHITNEY
Page -2-
Mr. Kenneth Rosland
July 15, 1992
ponds or water areas in. determining Lot Depth. Consequently, it is our opinion that
ponds or water areas located on a lot should not be excluded in determining Lot
Depth.
Support for this opinion is contained in the definition of "Lot Area"
under the Ordinances. This definition provides that area within a lot located below
the high water elevation of lakes, ponds and streams is specifically excluded from lot
area. The absence of this type of exclusion in the definition of Lot'Depth, when the
exclusion is contained in another definition in the same Ordinances, is evidence
that ponds or water areas should not be excluded in determining lot depth.
Should you have any questions concerning the foregoing, please give
me a call.
Yours truly,
kom P. Gilligan
JPG:cmn
cc: Craig Larsen
SHARED VENTURES, INC.
SUITE 410
E530 YORK AVENUE SOUTH
EDINA. MINNESOTA 55435
1612! 925-3411
Mr. Craig Larson
City of Edina Planning Department
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Larson:
PJ -eSGw 1 rL 1 04+44 ��Lu l9Z
July 15, 1992
This letter is in reference to the public hearing on the proposed subdivision of Lot 11,
Auditors Subdivision No. 325, by CDS Partners/Mark Dahlquist Addition. While I was
able to attend the Planning Commission review of the proposal, I regret that I am unable
to attend the hearing on July 20, but I would like to restate my position.
I live at 5224 Schaefer Road and have done so for 27 years so I am very familiar with the
neighborhood and have watched the development of it during that time.
In my opinion the proposed subdivision is particularly well conceived and its execution
would be in keeping with the area. The size of the lots and the positioning of the homes
should give very adequate separation from each other and from any existing houses. In
addition, the lots should command the size and quality of home in keeping with the
neighborhood.
Also, it appears to me that the request for a waiver of the 100 foot set -back from the
ponds would be in keeping with the other properties bordering on those very same ponds.
Thank you for the opportunity to express my views on this development.
Sincerely
0
6>•7W�/
Howard Weiner
A FEDERAL LICENSEE UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENT ACT Or 19
1-� A. ,��
o el
�Asue=` O
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
To: KENNETH ROSLAND
From: KRIS AAKER
Date: JULY 1, 1992
Subject: REQUEST TO PLACE
PLAY STRUCTURE IN
IN OPEN SPACE /CON-
SERVATION, 0
FOX MEADOW LANE.
Recommendation:
Info /Background:
Agenda Item #ITT _ B.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
❑
To Council
Action ❑
Motion
❑X
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Property owners of 6204 Fox Meadow Lane have returned to the
council to request city approval to locate a play system within a
conservation easement area in their rear yard.
No formal action was taken regarding this matter at. the June 15,
1992, City Council meeting. Placement of any structure within the
easement area requires written approval by the city. Please refer
to paragraph 1 on page 2 of the enclosed easement agreement. Also
enclosed are letters and information supplied by the property owner
and a neighboring property owner, a survey illustrating'location of
the play system, and a photo of the preferred system.
8
Z2 �
CONSERVATION RESTRICTION
(Open Space)
THIS INDENTURE, Made this f -
?j4 day of
1981, between DONALD D. BYERLY and MARLYS J. BYERL ,
husband and wife.(hereinafter called "Owner," whether one
or more), and the CITY OF EDINA, a municipal corporation
under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called
"Edina ").
WITNESSETH:
That Owner, in consideration of One Dollar ($1.00)
and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of
which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby Grant, Bargain,
Sell and Convey unto Edina, its successors and assigns,
.Forever, a Conservation Restriction pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes S 84.64, for the purposes and on the terms
hereinafter specified, over, on and across the tract or
parcel of land lying and being in the County of Hennepin
and the State of Minnesota, described in Exhibit A attached
hereto and made a part hereof (hereinafter called "Easement
Area ").
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE SAME, Together with all
the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging,
or in anywise appertaining, to Edina, its successors and
assigns, Forever. And Owner, for Owner and Owner's heirs,
representatives, successors.and assigns, covenants with
Edina, its successors and assigns, that it is well seized
in fee of the Easement Area , and has good right to convey
the interests therein pursuant hereto, and that the
Easement Area is free from all encumbrances except real
estate taxes and installments of special assessments
payable therewith which are not yet due. And the Easement
Area, in the quiet and peaceable possession of Edina, its
successors and assigns, for the purposes hereby granted,
against all persons lawfully claiming or to claim the
whole or any part thereof, subject to the encumbrances
hereinbefore mentioned, Owner will warrant and defend.
The purpose of this Conservation Restriction is
to assure that the Easement Area shall at all times remain
as open space and constitute scenic surroundings. To
accomplish this purpose, Owner, for Owner and Owner's
heirs, representatives, successors and assigns,. does
hereby covenant and agree that:
1. No buildings, roads, signs, billboards or
other advertising of any kind, and no utilities or other
structures of any kind shall be hereafter erected or
placed on or above any part of the Easement Area without
the express prior written approval of Edina.
2. No soil or other substance or material shall
be dumped or placed as landfill on the Easement Area
without the express prior written approval of Edina.
3. No trash, waste or unsightly or offensive
materials shall be dumped or placed on the Easement Area.
-2-
r
I
4. No loam, peat, gravel, soil, rock or other
material substance shall be excavated, dredged or removed
-from the Easement Area without the express prior written
approval of Edina. - ''
5. No activities detrimental to drainage, flood
control, water conservation, erosion control or soil.
conservation, or other acts or uses detrimental to the
Easement-Area as a scenic open space shall be conduc.tea or
permitted to be conducted on the Easement Area.
6. The Easement Area shall at all-times be kept
planted, shrubbed, sodded and otherwise landscaped
thereinafter collectively called "land.scaping ") -by Owner,
Owner's heirs, representatives, successors and assigns, in
a*manner reasonably acceptable to Edina.
-'7. The Easement Area, including landscaping,
shall be maintained at all times by Owner, Owner's heirs,
representatives, successors and assigns, in-full
compliance with all applicable ordinances-of-Edina now or
hereafter enacted. '
B. This Conservation Restriction shall not
operate to grant to Edina the right to use or improve, or
to permit the public to use or improve, the Easement-Area
as or for a park..
9. The rights and remedies given by Minnesota.
Statutes § 84.65 -shall be available to Edina. `Also, if
there shall be a violation or breach, or an attempt to
-3-
violate or breach, any of the terms, covenants or
conditions of this Conservation Restriction, Edina may
prosecute any proceedings at law or in equity against the
person, firm.or corporation violating or breaching, or
attempting to violate or breach, any such term, covenant
or condition, to either prevent such violation or breach
or to recover damages for such violation or breach. Also,
Edina,.in the event of such .violation or breach, without
notice, may, at its option, undertake to perform the term,
covenant or condition so violated or breached, and the
cost incurred, including attorneys' fees, with interest at
the highest rate then allowed by laic, or, if no maximum
rate is applicable, then,at the rate of twelve percent
(12 %) per annum, shall be payable by Owner, Owner's heirs,
representatives, successors and assigns, on demand made by
Edina, its successors and assigns, and Owner, Owner's
heirs, representatives, successors and assigns shall also
pay all costs of collection thereof, including attorneys'
fees, with interest thereon as above provided, if payment
is not made on demand, whether suit be brought or not. In
addition to other remedies then available for collection
of such costs and interest, Edina may charge such costs
and interest against the Easement hrerl and any other
property then included in the same tax parcel. as the
Easement Area, in the same manner as special assessm?nts
-4-
(without, however, any notice or hearing of any kind) and
collect the same with the real estate taxes against the
whole of such tax parcel which are payable in the year
following the year such costs and interest are so charged.
If such charges are not paid, the whole of such tax parcel
may be sold and conveyed in the same manner as lands
forfeited for nonpayment of real estate taxes are sold and
conveyed.
10. The terms, covenants and conditions hereof
shall run with the land and shall be binding on all
present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement
Area, and shall only inure to the benefit of Edina, its
successors and assigns, and may be amended or modified at
any time and from time to time, by the sole act of Edina
and the then owner of the Easement Area, and may be
released at any time by the sole act of Edina.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, Owner has caused these
presents to be executed the day and year first above
written.
Donald D. ByerYy
:-iti � - d �,,jw ,
Ma lys �J. Bye ly
This instrument is exempt from State Deed Tax.
-5-
July 7, 1992
Edina City Council
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing to you to briefly summarize the discussion at the June Council
meeting and to provide you with some new thoughts regarding the
placement of a 'play system on a conservation easement in our backyard.
I discussed the intent of the lawmakers when they composed the language
of the conservation. restriction. While many things are strictly prohibited,
recreation equipment is not. It is only included under the vague heading of
'other structures'. I do not believe it was the intent of the lawmakers to
restrict recreational equipment or activities since, as you will see later,
recreation areas are sometimes prohibited. The redwood structure itself
was carefully chosen to blend in with the natural surroundings and the
proposed placement was carefully selected to be hidden behind trees and
bushes.
It was brought out that in 1983, the council approved the placement of a
tennis court on a similar conservation restriction. I have enclosed a copy of
that easement and the council minutes of the approval. That easement, like
ours, does not include all of the property owners on the water. (Our
property borders on a fenced lot to the north, without any easement
restrictions, which has two wood piles, a pile of brush, a large tree house,
and a trampoline all within 100 feet of the pond). Unlike our conservation
restriction, the 1983 restriction was actually more limiting in that besides
prohibiting 'other structures', it also specifically prohibited a 'recreation
area'. The 1983 council, feeling that such recreation should be allowed on
open space, approved the tennis court and a surrounding fence.. I believe
that this decision establishes a strong precedent that should encourage
earnest consideration for my request.
The city attorney, Mr. Gilligan, mentioned that modifying the proposal may
help get it passed. If the council would be more amendable to a change in a
substance (other than redwood), size 0 2x28 vs. 11 x22), . or location (we
would have to do some major landscaping), we would be happy to do that.
In the end, what we are asking for is nothing more than being able to
provide our children with a safe place to play in our own back yard.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Paul McCormick
EASEMENT
For and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and
other valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,
Linneus G. Idstrom, single (herein called "Grantor "), does hereby grant,
bargain, sell, convey and warrant to the CITY OF EDINA, a municipal cor-
poration, in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota (herein called
"Grantee "), the following:
1. A perpetual easement over and in the property hereinafter
described (herein called "Easement Area "), and the bed and water of the body
of water on or adjoining the same, for the purpose of protecting the hy-
draulic efficiency and natural character and beauty of the Easement Area
and of the body of water on or adjoining the same; and the right and privi-
lege to enter upon the Easement Area with such men and equipment as are
necessary, in the opinion of tree City of Edina, for the doing of such.work
on the Easement Area as it deems necessary or desirable for accomplishment
of the purposes of this easement, including the right to remove or in any way
change or relocate any trees, shrubs, plants, or any growing or living thing
on the Easement Area, but not including, however, the right to construct or
maintain on the Easement Area any buildings or other structures of any kind.
- The rights and privileges herein granted to Grantee do not in-
elude any right to use the Easement Area for construction of public beaches,
docks or dockage facilities, paths for pedestrians, bicycles or vehicles,
or to create and maintain any public park or recreational area thereon.
The easements and rights hereby granted, bargained, sold, conveyed
irranted ate over, upon, across and in the tract of land situated in
neunepin County, State of iLinnesota, described as follows, to -wit:
That part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, GRAYTOWER ESTATES
lying Northerly of the following described line: Be-
ginning at a point in the East line of said Lot 1, dis-
tant 250 feet North of the Southeast corner thereof;
thence South 61 degrees 54 minutes 56 seconds West, a
distance of 106.84 feet; thence [lest 100 feet to a
point in the Westerly line of said Lot 1, distant 220
feet Northeasterly of the Southwest corner of said
Lot 1; thence North 42 degrees 26 minutes 20 seconds
West, a distance of 154.15 feet to the North line of
said Lot 2 and there terminating. For purposes of
this description, the East line of said Lot 1 is as-
sumed to bear North 1 degree 33 seconds East.
Grantor does covenant with the City of Edina, its successors and
assigns, that- it is well seized in fee of the Easement Area aforesaid, and
has good right to sell and convey the same in manner and form aforesaid,
and that the same are free from all encumbrances.
Grantor, for Grantor and Grantor's heirs, representatives, succes-
sors, and assigns, for the foregoing considerations, further agrees with re-
spect to the Easement Area as follows:
A. That no improvements of any kind shall be constructed on or
over all or any part of the Easement Area, and no excavating, filling, grad-
ing, or raising of the elevation of all or any part of the Easement Area
shall be made or done by Grantor. without, in each instance, first receiving
the prior consent of Grantee, its successors, or assigns.
B. That no consent of Grantee given pursuant hereto shall be ef-
fective until and unless filed of record in the appropriate office in Henne-
pin County, I'Linnesota, so as to give constructive notice thereof;
C. That any improvements constructed by Grantor, with the consent
ntee, when and if constructed, shall be ma. intained by Grantor and
Grantor's heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns, at Grantor's
and their own cost and expense, at all times, in a neat, clean, and safe
condition and in good state of repair;
D. That Grantor does hereby, for Grantor and Grantor's heirs,
representatives, successors, and assigns, remise, release, acquit, and for-
ever discharge Grantee, its successors and assigns, and any and all of its
officers and employees, of and from any and all claims, demands, or causes
of action of any kind or nature whatsoever that may arise or accrue by
virtue of. any entry upon or use of the Easement Area for any one or more
of the purposes of this easement;
E. If there shall be a violation or an attempt to violate any
of these covenants, restrictions, or reservations, it shall be lawful for
Grantee, its successors, or assigns, to prosecute any proceeding at law or
in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting. to violate
any such covenant, restriction, or reservation, and either to prevent him
or them from so doing or recover damages for such violation. The restric-
tions, covenants, and reservations herein contained shall be for the bene-
fit of Grantee, its successors,. and assigns, and may be amended, modified,
or terminated by a duly recorded resolution of the City of Edina making
such amendment, modification, or termination.
All of the provisions hereof shall run with the land and shall
extend to and bind and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives,
successors, grantees or assigns of the respective parties hereto.
This instrument is exempt from State Deed Tax.
-3 =
"•�•� nign water conditions on vv yyV�� v
Lane in Edina has caused flooding ofn backyards efor lresidents lint the f Cascade
WHEREAS, the Edina City Council has been concerned with the re`, and
water to the property of these residents, and a affect of the higr,
WHEREAS, the City has worked with the Min
protect the interests of Edina residents nwhoaborderek Watershed District to
WHEREAS, the Council and staff. have reviewed the reportnHickok
Creekt
Of aEaA. and
Associates, Engineer for Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, on the subjed Of High Water Investigations
Edina, dated Ma g Minnehaha Creek and Cascade Lane Vicinity,
y 11,.1983;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
investigation of that the Edina City Council supports
at the June 16 possible solutions to the high water conditions to be reported Motion for adoption3ofMtheeresolution was Watershed
secondedstrict meeting.
Rollcall: by Member Bredesen.
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Nays: None
Member Richards abstained.
SPECIAL USE ALLOWED /EASEMENT ON LOT 1, BLOCK 1 G
recalled that the petition for vacation of open space 0easementTin.order to co--
struct a tennis court had been heard at the March 7 Mr. Rosland
that Council had denied the request. , 1983, Council Meeting �i
the site and the proponent has 'reduced sthe esquare footage needed and is and
Council to reconsider the matter. Neal Erickson, Council Members had insper -ed
that this is a q , the property asking
unique and very isolated section of the Plake rand o herprobiemdarises
because of the multi -level
walls have been constructed grades
section of the
property. t He explained a pop that retaining
dwelling is located and therefore the tennis court cannot bep
moved tf where
the site. He also noted that the lake shoreline
the easement line to ut causing
up on
follow that contour and that the rest of this Point
is flat.
In response to Member Richards, Mr. Erickson stated that he intends t
iermanent structure, only the tennis court surface and a fence around it. Member
;chmidt questioned if other property on o build no
tion and Me Erickson other P y Mirror Lakes had the same easement restric-
tion
land surrounding Plied that there are no restrictions upon the majority of
a policy of 100 -- g the lake. Member Turner commented that the City had adopted
soot conservation restrictions from any body of water.
Richards submitted that the proponent's request had been modified and t
recreational use such as the t Member
offered the following type Proposed should be a hate felt
resolution for adoption: P trotted on open space and
BE IT RESOLVED SOLUTION ALLOWING SPECIAL USE ON EASEMENT
P pproximatet500esquare feet withinitherCitvaslope
shaped a the use of a
Lot 1, Block � trian¢ui�r
Graytower Estates for a tennis court. open space easement on
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Schmidt.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Richards, Schmidt, Courtney
Nays: Bredesen, Turner y
Resolution adopted.
July 7, 1992
Ms. Marcella Daehn
City of Edina /City Clerk
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Ms. Daehn,
I have spoken with Mr. Ben Nilsson (5200 Blake Road S) and he has
indicated that he will withdraw his protest to the play system in. my
backyard. He wants me to move the play system .about six feet to the west
so that it lies southwest of the line indicated on the enclosed property
survey which has the proposed placement area drawn in. To make this
'official', Mr. Nilsson would like to have the city send him a letter that
indicates you have received my 'letter of intent' to alter the proposed
placement.of the system. Once he receives your notice, he will withdraw
his protest. Thanks again for your time.
Sincerely,
Paul McCormick
6204 Fox Meadow Lane
Edina, MN 55436
A-V
•V7•0
3: (ft
0
cli
P.
us 27
h,
0
N
O ra / ��ol ph
4:1
4b
'o
C) cil
11
SLIMEN hilt:, lvfl4A-4-cl A'A'[E""
DESCRIPTInN: ;,.t ?• HI.cK 1, OAK PONDS ni,
:V11:111ACHEN.
he llerchv ccf*tll\• "ll-It this is a true and correct
representation .•i ;, !:ur\e%- (,t' the himnoarief: of The
iand abjj% e lii,criheu and t.: ,!:t: it,cai ion .i a; I
bui idinL!., it anv. inercun, and ai i % igihic encroach-
munts. .Y all% . i rmi or in said land.
haled tills i•ll. U;.% -11
S, I I .\ v v
:,G'I E: scavinv-, d,,- assumcu.
Oinoivai— —C..Ul
fP-a 7. :33
iiasemi-li• l! '-f. 9 3?. 33
;,
V IN S89-51"52t"E.
3768
fN IN r, T f-r
L
E D
C.,
El,
'v of Ec;ra B'do Dent
942. IM 01 1
S.8905ZIB"E.
FOX MEADOW LANE
;
v Ti
Tk9m I ► AID i —113
T7
Cm ul
ID
Ir?
:zr 7
I
VO&7z
9woez
942. IM 01 1
S.8905ZIB"E.
FOX MEADOW LANE
;
v Ti
=1k
City of Edina
July 8, 1992
Mr. Ben Nilsson.
5200 Blake Road South
Edina, MN
55436
Re: Placement of a play system within the backyard conservation
easement area of property located at 6204 Fox Meadow Lane
Dear Mr. Nilsson:
Pursuant to your request for a letter from the city regarding the
proposed play structure to be located at the above referenced
property, I have enclosed a copy of letters' from Paul McCormick,
6204 Fox Meadow Lane.
Mr. McCormick had indicated in his letters dated July 7, 1992, his,
intent for play system placement. If you should require any
additional information or require assistance please contact me at
your convenience.
Sincerely,
Kris P. Aaker
Assistant Planner
KPA/ j h
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 927 -7645
EDINA. MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 92? -5461
July 13, 1992
Ms. Marcella Daehn
City of Edina/City Clerk
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424 '
Dear Ms. Daehr/:
Enclosed is our response to the July 7, 1992 letters to your office, the
Mayor and City Council Members, from Paul McCormick, 6204 Fox Meadow Lane,
Edina, MN 55436.
If you should require any additional information, please contact us at
Your convenience.
'
��.
Bengt ~E. & Ann L. Nilsson
5200 Blake Road S.
Edina, MN 55436
Enclosure
July 13. X992
Edina City .Council
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55436
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
This letter is in response to the July 7 letter sent you by Paul
McCormick, 6204 Fox Meadow Lane, regarding the placement of a play system
structure on a conservation easement in our back: yard.
Previously we had filed an objection to this play system for two reasons:
first, that it was to be placed in the conservation easement area of our
yards; and, that the placement shown on the map indicated that it would be
placed partially within a 75 foot legally recorded "use easement" that
involves both of our back yards.
We have discussed this further with Mr. McCormick: and have agreed,
verbally, that we will not object to the placement of the play system as
long as it does not encroach on our 75 foot "use easement ". This is also
confirmed by the letter from Mr. McCormick to Ms. Marcella Daehn, dated
July 7, 1992. As.stated in his letter, if the placement of a play system
is approved by you, he will move the system about six feet to the west to
avoid it being placed on our. "use easement ".
If you require any additional information or clarification, please feel
free to contact us at 933-2927.
el Y,
Bengt E. ° Ann L. Nilsson
52i >0 Blake Road S.
Edina, MN 55436
OAK PONDS OF l N T E R L A C H E N EGAN,FIES RVE ORS INC.
t 01 fA
s FOX MEADOW
I OUTLOT
A_ ..... - -fv
LANE
I
I
I
I
SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS:
t
1
i
1
1
I
ME
...� ... ; .f o ..
LANE
S BJ'Si 11 "A'
IrJ I J I
,
Bbl'
=
�•
;
�
�
^ !! I ��
NSJ'�l,/..✓ l.'l 0J - 1 .: iii I -.
•y+,
t
� V
I
1
_2•'�•:- ••
`,
T
••
2 2
,f
•
♦a __
'`'t JIB
iL,
't f�
tl
4
;
'r. so w Ave 00
'
•w M rw
I
- i
.p.• -�yI +
,Irn - 1. ...I.. •.
I
4
,�
BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED
•.; 11
h
i
s/J•r.i!'E Java
3
-DENOTES IRON MONUMENT
\
'I
p
°DENOTES JUDICIAL
a
,c11
.i
1
LANDMARK
61
L••...• %1 •"t u . 1.51 w1.•t •rl t".. •rt
8
` 3
-
'FOX '
•iY �:�
u,•c q o rfl• ... •o fui f wn
L nh.
�
t 01 fA
s FOX MEADOW
I OUTLOT
A_ ..... - -fv
LANE
I
I
I
I
SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS:
t
1
i
1
1
I
ME
...� ... ; .f o ..
LANE
'
r. ..,
NSJ'�l,/..✓ l.'l 0J - 1 .: iii I -.
I
i
ti
2 2
I
3
7
tl
4
;
'
`� I
I
- i
.p.• -�yI +
,Irn - 1. ...I.. •.
�
-
�
h
\
t 01 fA
s FOX MEADOW
I OUTLOT
A_ ..... - -fv
LANE
I
I
I
I
SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS:
t
1
i
1
1
I
"RIDER" TO THAT PURCHASE AGREEMENT.
DATED DECEMBER 20, 1982,
RESPECTING LOT 7, BLOCK 1, "OAK PONDS OF INTERLACHEN"
$31,000.00 by the parties entering into a Contract for Deed providing for monthly installments
in the amount of $280.00 or more. to include interest, which shall begin to accrue on the date
of closing, at the rate of ten percent (10 %) per annum. Said monthly payments of principal and
interest shall commence thirty (30) days after the date of closing and shall continue on the
same day of each month thereafter until February 1, 1984, at which time the entire unpaid
principal balance together with accrued interest shall be due and payable in full. Payments
shall be applied first to accrued interest, and second to the reduction of .principal balances.
Buyer has the right to prepay this Contract for Deed at any time without penalty.
Buyer, at his sole expense, within nine (9) months from the date of commencement of construction,
shall improve lot as follows: sod and maintain the side yards and the front yard of his lot
including right of way to street. (boulevard). and pave and maintain driveway from garage to stree!
Buyer. at his sole expense, within eight (8) months from the date of commencement of construc-
tion shall complete exterior of house according to plans and specifications.. Upon submission
of house plans and site plan showing location of house and driveway on lot to Seller, Buyer must
also submit color chip showing exterior color of house.
The terms, covenants and conditions of this Purchase Agreement shall survive the closing of this
transaction and therefore shall continue in full force and effect after the closing.
Buyer acknowledges that Seller has informed Buyer that the subject premises are to be subject to
certain protective covenants and that a copy of the same has been delivered to Buyer. Buyer
further acknowledges that Buyer has reviewed said protective covenants and hereby approves the
same and agrees that Buyer shall not object to Seller's title to the subject premises by reason
of the existence of said protective covenants or anything contained therein, provided, however,
nothing herein contained shall preclude Buyer from objecting to Seller's title to the subject
premises in the event that any existing condition of the subject premises is violative of any of
the terms and conditions of the protective covenants.
Seller agrees to have the following services installed in the subject development at Seller's
expense: underground (if available) telephone service, electrical and natural gas. Any refunds/.
lof monies deposited at the City or utility companies shall be the sole property of the Seller. /e
Except as expressly set forth, herein, Seller shall not be required to make any improvements,
which are not specifically outlined in this Agreement to the subject premises of any kind as a
condition herein as a precedent or subsequent to the sale contemplated herein. Without limiting
the generality of the foregoing, it is understood that the cost of terracing. lot grading, soil,
testing, sodding, landscaping, tree planting. retaining walls, tree removal and Water and sewer
connection or hook -up charges shall be the sole obligation of Buyer.
Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, it is understood that the obligations
of Buyer pursuant to this Purchase Agreement are contingent upon the following:
1. Lot to be approved by architect.
2. .Ability to obtain building permit on lot.
3. Satisfactory soil sample testing for lot.
4. Lawyer's approval of title and purchase agreement for lot. e
5. As shown on Exhibit A, the area which is approximately 75' in width which lies
F directly west of Lot 7, and which is the northerly part of Lot.5, Block 1, Oak
Ponds of Interlachen is marked in "green "; it is agreed by the Seller that
the Buyer will have an easement right to use this area along with the
n owner of Lot 5, Block l; however, neither the owner of Lot 7 nor the owner of
Lot 5 will be permitted to construct any building in this easement area and,
in fact, neither will be permitted to alter the existing vegetation unless
the owners of Lot 5., Lot 7 and the Seller, herein, are of mutual accord. Seller
shall render to Buyer this easement at the time. the contract for deed is
' aid
Buyer has right to commence construction of home at time of closing and final
balloon payment due on final closing of home on or before February 1, 1 1984.
In the event that Buyer does not obtain satisfaction of the conditions set forth above on or
before February 1, 1983, Buyer shall have the option, exercisable by written notice given to
Seller on or before February 1, 1983, to (1) waive satisfaction of any thing unsatisfied condi-
tion; or (2) elect to terminate this Purchase Agreement, in which latter event, this Purchase
Agreement shall be null and void and of no further effect, and neither party shall have any
further liability to the other hereunder except that the earnest money referred to herein shall
be refunded immediately to Buyer, provided nothing contained in this last sentence shall be
construed to prevent Buyer from waiving satisfaction of any unsatisfied condition or terminating
this Purchase Agreement prior to February 1, 1983.
This offer to be void, if not accepted in writing by Buyer no later than 12:00,noon,
June 4, 1992
Ms. Marcella Daehn
City of Edina /City Clerk
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Ms. Daehn,
We have been working with Kristine Paulson -Aaker on approval for placing a
'play system' on a conservation easement ( #1438393) in our backyard. Since the
easement prohibits placement of any structures in this area without 'express prior
written approval of Edina', we would like to ask the city council for permission to
place the 'play system' in this area. This is the only area in the yard that the play
system could be placed on since our front yard is small (and landscaped) and there
is no room on either side of our house. The backyard (grass) is sloped except for
the proposed placement area.
The 'play system' (photo enclosed) is constructed of redwood and includes
swings, a slide, and a play platform. It is free standing. It is approximately 28
feet long (with the slide) and 12 feet wide. The dimensions and location are
shaded in on the enclosed site survey of our property.
Secondarily, if the above is approved, could we also have permission to place
some pea gravel about the base to keep the area from becoming a mud bath when
it rains. The gravel could then be replaced with sod when the system is removed.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Paul and Jani a McCormick
6204 Fox Meadow Lane
Edina, MN 55436
i
1 '
mat
rr,C
r
F1
'.5200)" Bl a4::e Road
Edina, Minnesota 55436
June 11, 199
J
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL:
This letter is in response to the request by Paul and Janice McCormick,
6'204 Fo,,.,, Meadow Lane to place a structure on Open Space Conservation
Easement #1438_9'.
To place.the proposed structure, would be in direct violation of our
Deeded 75 foot Use Easement on the rear of our property down to the lake.
We have included Exhibits A °c B, which were attached to our original
purchase agreement for the lot. These exhibits are highlighted as
appropriate.
We also object to their request fpr the following reasons: Edina has
consistently made a strong effort to conserve natural resources, including
habitat for wildlife. As homeowners sharing a portion of this Easement,
we are privileged to be able to enjoy wildlife in their natural habitat.
We see several families of Wood DUCt.:s that seem to return, for some
unknown reason, March ?7th of each year. Housing is provided to ensure
their continued existence in the middle of a large metropolitan area.
During the eight years we have lived in Our home, we have seen the deer
count decline, now down to only 1 or ? with each new structure added
around the pond. The Conservation Easement has obviously assisted these
animals to attempt to live in concert with humans, i.e. it has provided a
"safe" barrier between humans and animals. We also enjoy each year the
ritual,.of turtles coming out of the pond and Up.onto our lawns to
carefully lay their eggs for the nest generation. These things can only
= ontinue with the Conservation Easement intact. An added benefit of this
is the beautiful tranquil setting created by all of the lawns, trees, etc.
sloping down to the lake creating a park -lik.e atmosphere.
The former owners of 6204 Fox Meadow Lane, the Whitneys, had a small girl
for whom they built a large terraced permanent sandbox type structure that
adjoins the deck: of the present owners. This is not indicated on the site
survey submitted to the city by the McCormick's. This area is quite
private in that it is beautifully landscaped around it. The former owners
had, on this setting, a very large play system structure such as Mr. &
Mrs. McCormick propose. They also had room for a doll house that was
appropriate for small children to play in. Clearly there is adequate
space to utilize, that would not compromise the Conservation Easement, nor
our Deeded Use Easement.
We firmly request that the Easement be left intact, so that humans and
wildlife can continue to share the backyard with appropriate space and
safety for each. Such action can only enhance the future for the next
generation of humans and wildlife.
Due to circumstances beyond our control, we are unable to attend the
Council Meeting.
Sincere y,
Bengt E. Ann L. Nilsson
Enclosures
7;4 A.
%' REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
~n'.RroM•
:den
To: KENNETH ROSLAND
From: KRIS AAKER
Date: JULY 20, 19 9 2
Subject: C -92 -2, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR PARK-
ING LOT EXPANSION,
CROSSVIEW LUTHERAN
CHURCH, 6645 McCAULEY
TRAIL.
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #III . c .
Consent ❑
Information Only
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
0 To Council
Action 0 Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Grant Conditional Use Approval subject to approval of final grading
plan by the city engineer with special review by the engineer of
the south section of the site. The Planning Commission
recommendation was unanimous.
Info /Background:
Crossview Lutheran Church has submitted a Conditional Use Permit
.application to increase their parking lot from 106 to 225'spaces.
The proposed plan is consistent with the church master .plan
reviewed by the city in 1984.
DRAFT MINUTES, REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 11
1992
C -92 -2 Condition Use Permit, Crossview Lutheran Church,
6645 McCauley Trail
Request: Parking Lot Expansion
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission Crosstown Lutheran Church
has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the expansion
of their existing parking lot. The proposed expansion would
increase parking from 105 spaces to 198 spaces. The additional,
parking spaces would support enlarging sanctuary seating from 300
to 450 seats.
Mr.Larsen said the Conditional Use Permit application is only
for parking lot expansion. It is staff's understanding that the
church will return in about a year to propose an expansion of the
education wing of the building.
Mr. Larsen concluded the proposed expansion is consistent. with
the church master plan. This plan was review by the City in 1984
when the church sold its excess land for the Timber Trail
development. The amount and location of the parking comply with
ordinance requirements. The additional landscaping and irrigation
system will improve the berm which screens the parking lot.
Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit
subject to approval of the final grading plan by the City Engineer.
Commissioner McClelland questioned if the plans as submitted
would have to be illustrated with more detail for final approval by
the city engineer. Mr. Larsen responded that that is correct. He
noted the plan presented this evening is not detailed and is not
the final grading plan. If the city engineer does not agree with
the proposal as submitted they would have to conform to the
engineer's specifications.
Commissioner. Workinger said that he is uncomfortable with the
height of the berm, and the height of the plantings. He said his
concern.centers on if a safe clearview is present.
Mr. Larsen said the engineering department will review the
proposal and are aware of the requirements to maintain clearview.
Mr. Larsen pointed out at present there are 3 -4 homes south of the
subject site and there appears to be adequate site distances. Mr.
Larsen reiterated that the clearview issue will be cleared by the
city engineer.
Mr. Sedgewick, representing the church noted that it is the
intent of the church to be a good neighbor which is the reason for
the number of plantings on the berm.
Commissioner Johnson expressed concern that the grade when
exiting the lot is 10 %, and could pose a potential safety hazard
for cars exiting out. He added the grade creates the need for cars
to accelerate, and with the berm and plantings clearview may be
obstructed.
Mr. Sedgewick explained that the reason for the height of the
berm is that,-the developer kept moving fill into this area. He
explained the church has tried to create an attractive berm despite
it's height. Mr. Sedgewick pointed out the berm acts as a screen
to residential property and it is the desire of the church to
soften the impact of the berm with plantings.
Commissioner Runyan noted that the parking lot is below street
level and does not have impact from the street.
Commissioner McClelland suggested that the exit be angled and
if lower vegetation is planted that may solve some of the questions
on clearview.
Commissioner Workinger noted that the vehicles entering the
site have adequate view. Continuing, Commissioner Workinger asked
if this plan has been presented to the residents on Timber Trail.
Mr. Sedgewick responded that the proposal has been presented to all
immediate neighbors. He pointed out neighbors to the south want
the berm to remain intact with vegetation.because it provides them
screening from the parking lot and the church.
Commissioner McClelland asked the church if they would be
willing to just have grass planted on the berm. Mr. Sedgewick said
the church and neighbors would prefer that plantings remain. He
added the church is also planning to construct.a sprinkler system
on the berm to ensure that it is always maintained and kept green.
Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if this is the plan
that was approved by the commission and council is 1984. Mr.
Larsen responded that is correct. Commissioner McClelland also
asked if the church is still considering to complete these
expansion plans.
Mr. Sedgewick said our new pastor in a sense has created the
problem. because since he has been with us our membership has grown.
He said our church is continuing to grow, and we need to meet the
requirements of our growing membership by expanding in the near
future.
Commissioner Johnson moved Conditional Use Approval subject to
the approval of a final grading plan by the city engineer with
special review by the engineer of the south section of the site.
Commissioner Hale seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion
carried.
A-
LOC tION IWAIP
FORD CT FOUNTAINWOOD IZZ
APTS.
I N A 'NEST A PTS.
o 0.
t
II
14
r, I
s!n.
MEN
CONDITIONAL USE
NUMBER C-92-2
L 0 C A T 10 N 6645 McCauley Trail
REQUEST
EDINA -PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
JULY 1, 1992
STAFF REPORT
C -92 -2 Condition Use Permit, Crossview Lutheran Church,
6645 McCauley Trail
Request: Parking Lot E$pansion
Crosstown Lutheran Church has applied for a Conditional Use
Permit to allow for the expansion of their existing parking lot.
The proposed expansion would increase parking from 105 spaces to
198 spaces. The additional parking spaces would support enlarging
sanctuary seating from 300 to 450 seats.
The Zoning Ordinance requires one space for each three seats
in the largest area of assembly. In this case 150 spaces are
required. Thus, 48 spaces remain to support concurrent activities.
The proposed parking is in compliance with Zoning Ordinance
standards. One additional curb cut to Timber Trail will be
provided at the southerly end of the parking lot.
The Conditional Use Permit application is only for parking lot
expansion. It is staff's understanding that the church will return
in about a year to propose an expansion of the education wing of
the building.
Recommendation:
The proposed expansion is consistent with the church master
plan. This plan was review by the City in 1984 when the church
sold its excess land for the Timber Trail development. The amount
and location of the parking comply with ordinance requirements.
The additional landscaping and irrigation system.will improve the
berm which screens the parking lot.
Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit
subject to approval of the final grading plan by the City Engineer.
Gross View ,CutheraH Church
and Sarly elrlldbod Coder
DEAN NADASDY LISA K. KEYNE, DIRECTOR PAUL KRENTZ, DIRECTOR JAN N. STOCKMAN. DIRECTOR REBECCA WALLER, DIRECTOR
PASTOR CHURCH GROWTH MINISTRIES CHRISTIAN EDUCATION EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER MUSIC MINISTRIES
June 17, 1992
Edina Planning Department-.
4801 West 50th Street
Edina MN 55424
ATT: Craig Larson
RE: Request for Conditional. Use, Permit.
Dear Mr. Larson,
Cross View Lutheran Church requests the City of Edina issue
a Conditional Use Permit.for additional parking.
Parking lot construction will conform to Edina code
requirements.
Two Conditional Use permit signs, as required, will be
posted on Church property.
It is our intention to: review this parking and screening
plan with the adjacent neighbors, prior to public hearings.
CHURCH GROWTH
In the past five ,years Cross View Lutheran Church has grown
from 667 to 930 members. Sunday church attendance has grown
from 297 to 427. On Sundays and on days that we offer special
services members must park on adjacent streets. Our five year
projections show church membership at 1255 and Sunday attendance
at 650.
SANCTUARY COMPLETION
Our sanctuary is designed to seat 450 when all pews are in
place. Presently, 300 can be seated in pews. Folding chairs
are added as needed. to fill out the seating space. A copy of
the sanctuary plan is attached. We have been reviewing
sanctuary seating with the Fire Department, to assure our
compliance with all building and safety codes.
EDUCATIONAL EXPANSION.
With our increase in membership, we find educational space
is also falling short.
A drawing showing a 10,000 sq foot addition to our present
education wing is attached (5000 sq feet per floor.)
6645 MCCAULEY TRAIL, EDINA, MINNESOTA 55439-1076 CHURCH (612)941 -1094; EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER (612)941 -0009
MASTER PLAN:
Anticipated building expansion, sanctuary completion, and
parking lot expansion are all part of our master plan submitted
six years ago when we added our present education wing. Funds
are now available to complete the seating and expand the parking
lot.
Enclosures:
Attached to this request are:
1. Drawings and detail for parking area.
2. Survey with existing elevations of parking area.
3. Screening and planting plan for completed parking
lot.
4. Sanctuary seating plan.
5. Site plan showing proposed building addition, and
additional parking.
Cross View needs to complete the parking lot expansion this
summer. As Fall arrives we will not have sufficient parking in
our present lots. Overflow will probably end up with street
parking. We want to avoid this probability.
Mr. Larson, I want to thank
helping us understand the city
't 544 -0372 week days if you need
Sincerely,
Charles Sedgwick
Building Committee Chair
you and your associates for
codes. Please call me at
additional information.
Crania Vi @w Luth @ran Ch@r @h
6645 McCauley Trail
Edina, MN 55436
PARKING LOT, LAND SCAPING AND SCREENING SCHEDULE
EAST SIDE OF PARKING LOT
1. Black Hills Spruce
2. Red Twig Dogwood
3. Australian Pine 5' to 6'
4. Mountain Ash
5. Grass between group plantings to hold
on berm.
6. Juniper Spirea
7. 5 foot existing berm screens full length of West side
SOUTH SIDE OF PARKING LOT
6. Juniper Spirea
11. Ninebark
12. Honey Suckle
3. Australian Pine 5' to 6'
13. 4 foot decrative opaque fence
WEST SIDE OF PARKING LOT
Existing' wooded area. Trees and mature sumack screen
adjacent property.
14. Water sprinkler sysytem to maintain.plantings on East
and South side.
M101
NVIa NOO IJ
�.
tN+laal0
NoanN� NYaaNlm AYdIA550a9
Y105"IR / YNIdl
AqLwwldm
a
J
IVA
FhlbTl� P
W"Cl
'1- i
X.
pecs�zrt t--lo�
1
1
"6-%p It
PEL
sr�iP
T /iVG
J �rIt
C-C I �
.
/yy3
J
Zl�f Ag ---cst. k: im-Ib �, ry.�� ��oTa� �r/u =Y 7 riI
EXIST BUILDING lo PARKING LOT
Cross View Lutheran Church.
L 6645 Mc Cauley Trail
Edina, Minnesota 55436
_ 1
1
_ - -- ` — — — — — — — — — — — — 1
x�
c
0
IO c
3
Y
uA
o� ti
4,
o.
i
as'
-f /
i
�c A ML
/ J
17 r e/T � j "
G OR
EXIST 2 —ST f R
Scale.- 1 inch equals 50 feet.
Ron Krueger & Associates
8080 Wallace Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
May 1,1992
a:.
PARKING PLAN
DRIVING LANES - 25'
PARKING STALLS - 9'
PARKING STALLS - 19'
LOWER LOT EXISTING PARKIN
LOWER LOT WITH EXPANSION
UPPER LOT EXISTING
30'
T�
WIDE
WIDE
DEEP
G 65 CARS
158 CARS
40 CARS
s; EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
-EXIST BUILDING ' PARKING LOT
*.
Cross View Lutheran Church
6645 Mc Cauley Trail
Edina, Minnesota 55436
— - - — — — — — — --
D
O
z
220
175r
\
\
fkjST B�
� R
EXIST 2 ST FR
J�
/ / 1
/ / I
/ I 1
qq'S
/ / I
J /
/ / I
1 / 1
1 / 1
/ 1
1 I
Ron Krueger & Associates
8080 Wallace Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
May 1, 1992
Scale - 1 inch equals -50 feet.
-1--7—PLANTING AND SCREENING-PLAN.
EXIST BUILDING
PARKING LOT
Cross View Lutheran Church
6645 Mc Cauley Trail
Edina, Minnesota 55436
— --- — — — — — — — — — —
LL - - - -1
N
I I I Q
'A
17S
ear oR
Ir
I
—sT FIR
J�
0.
-Ij
0 ZI I .
Ron Krueger & Associates
8080. Wallace Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
May 1, 1992
Scale 1 inch.equals 50 feet.
r4 ' .yam:
ko
�.,
. \J .o •
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: KENNETH ROSLAND Agenda Item w IQ�s�nt
From: KRIS AAKER
Date: JULY 20, 1992 i
Subject: YEAR XVIII COMMUNITYI
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT (CDBG)AGREE-
MFATT
Recommendation:
Consent i X
Information Only
Mgr. Recommends % To HRA
To Council
Action Motion
x Resolution
Ordinance
Discussion i
Authorize execution of attached agreement by Mayor and Manager.
INFO /BACKGROUND
Hennepin County's Year XVIII CDBG budget has been approved by
H.U.D. The attached agreement set forth the .conditions to using
Edina's allocation of $150,913. Individual projects are the same
as those approved by the City Council in April of this year. The
individual projects are:
Adaptive Recreation Program $ 3,000
Child Day Care 8,182
Handicapped Access 77,731
H.O.M.E. 22,000
Rehab of Private Property 40,000
$15D,913
i
Contract No. A09482
SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF.HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as "RECIPIENT," A -2400 Government
Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, and CITY OF EDINA, hereinafter referred
to as "SUBRECIPIENT," 4801 West 50th Street,: Edina, MN 55424 said parties to this
Agreement each being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and is made
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59:
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, Recipient has received a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
entitlement allocation under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1974, as amended, to carry out various community development activities in
cooperation with Subrecipient, according to the implementing regulations at 24
CFR Part 570; and
WHEREAS, $ 150.913.00 from Federal Fiscal Year 1992 CDBG funds has been
approved by Recipient for use by Subrecipient for the implementation of eligible
and fundable community development activity /ies as included in and a part of the
1992 Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds, Urban Hennepin County
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, and as set forth in the
Statement of Work described in Exhibit 1 to this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Subrecipient agrees to assume certain responsibilities for the
implementation .of the approved activities described in Exhibit 1, said
responsibilities being specified in part in the Joint Cooperation Agreement
effective October 1, 1991, executed between Recipient and Subrecipient on August
20, 199.1, and in the 1992 Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds,
Urban Hennepin County CDBG program and the Certifications contained therein.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereunto do hereby agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. The Subrecipient shall expend all or any part of its CDBG allocation
only on those activities identified in Exhibit 1, "Statement of Work,"
subject to the requirements of this Agreement and the stipulations and
requirements set forth in Exhibit 1 to this Agreement.
B. The Subrecipient shall take all necessary actions, not only to comply
with the stipulations as set out in Exhibit 1, but to comply with any
requests by the Recipient in that connection; it being understood that
the Recipient is responsible to the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) for ensuring compliance with such requirements. The
Subrecipient also will promptly notify the Recipient of any changes in
the scope or character of the activity /ies which it is implementing.
harmless the Recipient from and against all costs, expenses, claims,
suits or judgments arising from or growing out of any injuries, loss
or damage sustained by any person or corporation, including employees
of.Subrecipient and property of Subrecipient, which are caused by or
sustained in connection with the tasks carried out by the Subrecipient
under this Agreement.
B. The Subrecipient does further agree that in order to protect itself as
well as the Recipient under the indemnity agreement provisions .
hereinabove set forth it will at all times during the term of this
Agreement and any renewal thereof,: have and keep in force: a single
limit or - combined limit or excess umbrella commercial and general
liability insurance policy of an amount of not less than $600,000 for
property damage arising from one occurrence, $600,000 for damages
arising from death and /or total bodily injuries arising from one
occurrence, and $600,000 for total personal injuries arising from one
.occurrence. Such policy shall also include contractual liability
coverage protecting the Recipient, its officers, agents and employees
by a certificate acknowledging this Agreement between.the Subrecipient
and the Recipient.
C. The Subrecipient's liability, however, shall be governed by the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466.
7. ' CONFLICT OF INTEREST
A. In the procurement . of supplies, equipment, construction, and services
by the Subrecipient, the conflict of interest provisions in 24 CFR
.85.36 and OMB Circular A -110 shall apply.
B. In all other cases, the provisions of 24 CFR 570.611 shall apply.
8. DATA PRIVACY
The Subrecipient agrees to abide by-the provisions of the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act and all other applicable state and federal
laws, rules, and regulations relating to data privacy or confidentiality,
and as any of the same may be amended. The Subrecipient agrees to defend
and hold the Recipient, its officers, agents,.and employees harmless from
any claims resulting from the Subrecipient's unlawful disclosure and /or use
of such protected data.
9. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION
A. If the Subrecipient materially fails to comply with any term of this
Agreement or so fails to administer the work as to endanger the
performance of this Agreement, this shall constitute noncompliance and
a default. Unless the Subrecipient's default is excused by the
Recipient, the Recipient may take one or more of the actions
prescribed in 24 CFR 85.43, including the option of immediately
cancelling this Agreement in its entirety.
B. The Recipient's failure to insist upon strict performance of any
requirements. The Recipient shall provide advice and staff assistance to
the Subrecipient to carry out its CDBG- funded activity /ies.
12. ACQUISITION. RELOCATION. AND DISPLACEMENT
A. The Subrecipient shall be responsible for carrying out all
acquisitions of real property necessary for implementation of. the
activity /ies. The Subrecipient shall conduct all such acquisitions in
its name, or in the name of any of its public, governmental, nonprofit
agencies as authorized by its governing body, which shall hold title
to all real property purchased. The Subrecipient shall be responsible
for preparation of all notices, -appraisals, and documentation required
in conducting acquisition under the latest applicable regulations of
the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of
1970 and of the CDBG Program. The Subrecipient shall also be
responsible for providing all relocation notices, counseling, and
services required by said regulations. The Recipient shall provide
advice and staff assistance to the Subrecipient to carry out its CDBG-
funded activity /ies.
B. The Subrecipient shall comply with the acquisition and relocation
requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property
Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 as required under 24 CFR 570.606(a)
and HUD implementing regulations at 24 CFR 42; the requirements in 24
CFR 570.606(b) governing the residential antidisplacement and
relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974 (the Act); the relocation
requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(c) governing displacement subject to
section 104(k) of the Act; and the requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(d)
governing optional relocation assistance under section 105(a)(11) of
the Act.
13. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Recipient shall determine the level of environmental review required
under 24 CFR Part 58 and maintain the environmental review record on all
activities. The Subrecipient shall be responsible for providing necessary
information, relevant documents, and public notices to the Recipient to
accomplish this task.
14. LABOR STANDARDS. EMPLOYMENT, AND CONTRACTING
The Recipient shall be responsible for the preparation of all requests for
HUD for wage rate determinations on CDBG activities undertaken by the
Subrecipient. The Subrecipient shall notify the Recipient prior to
initiating any activity, including advertising for contractual services
which will include costs likely to be subject to the provisions on Federal
Labor Standards and Equal Employment Opportunity and related implementing
regulations. The Recipient will provide technical assistance to the
Subrecipient to ensure compliance with these requirements.
if the conditions of 24.CFR 570.503(b)(8)(i) are met and satisfied.
Fair market value shall be established by a current written appraisal
by a qualified' appraiser. The Recipient will have the option of
requiring a second appraisal after review of the initial appraisal.
C. Any program income generated from the disposition or transfer of real
property prior to or subsequent to the close -out, change of status or
termination of the Joint Cooperation Agreement between the Recipient
and the Subrecipient shall be repaid to the Recipient at the time of
disposition or transfer of the property.
17. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
The uniform. administrative requirements delineated in 24 CFR.570.502 and
any and all administrative requirements or guidelines promulgated by the
Recipient shall apply to all activities undertaken by the Subrecipient
provided. for in this Agreement and to any program. income generated
therefrom.
18. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND ESL OPPORTUNITY
A. During the performance of this Agreement,. the Subrecipient agrees to
the following: In accordance with the Hennepin.County Affirmative
Action Policy and the County Commissioners' Policies Against
Discrimination, no person shall be excluded from full employment
rights or participation in, or the benefits of, any program, service
or activity on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex,
disability, marital status, affectional /sexual preference, public
assistance status, ex- offender status, or national origin; and no
person who is protected by applicable federal or state laws against
discrimination shall be otherwise subjected to discrimination.
B. The Subrecipient will furnish all information and reports required to
comply with the provisions of 24 CFR Part 570 and all applicable state
and federal laws, rules, and regulations pertaining to discrimination
and equal opportunity.
19. NON - DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DISABILITY
A. The Subrecipient shall comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, as amended, to ensure that no otherwise qualified
individual with a handicap, as defined in Section 504, shall, .solely
by reason of his or her handicap, be excluded from participation in,
be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination by the
Subrecipient receiving assistance from the Recipient under Section 106
and /or Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1974, as amended.
B. When and where applicable, the Subrecipient shall comply with, and
make best efforts to have its third party providers comply with,
Public Law 101 - 336 Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Title I
"Employment," Title II "Public Services" - Subtitle A, and Title III
"Public Accomodations and Services Operated By Private Entities" and
25. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
26.
The Recipient agrees to provide technical assistance to the Subrecipient in
the form of oral and /or written guidance and on -site assistance regarding
CDBG procedures and project management. This assistance will be provided
as requested by the Subrecipient, and at other times at the initiative of
the Recipient when new or updated information concerning the CDBG Program
is received by the Recipient and deemed necessary to be provided to the
Subrecipient.
The Subrecipient shall maintain records of the receipt and expenditure of
all CDBG funds, such records to be maintained in accordance with OMB
Circulars A -87 and the "Common Rule" Administrative Requirements in 24 CFR
85 and in accordance with OMB Circular A -110 and A -122, as applicable. All
records shall be made available upon request of the Recipient for
inspection /s and audit /s by the Recipient or its representatives. If a
financial audit /s determines that the Subrecipient has improperly expended
CDBG funds, resulting in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) disallowing such expenditures, the Recipient reserves the
right to recover from the Subrecipient such disallowed expenditures from
non -CDBG sources. Audit procedures are specified below in Section 22 of
this Agreement.
27. ACCESS TO RECORDS
The Recipient shall have authority to review any and all procedures and all
materials, notices, documents, etc., prepared by the Subrecipient in
implementation of this Agreement, and the Subrecipient agrees to provide
all information required by any person- authorized by the Recipient to
request such information from the Subrecipient for the purpose of reviewing
the same.
28. AUDIT
The Subrecipient agrees to provide Recipient with an annual audit
consistent with the Single Audit Act of 1984, (U.S. Public Law 98 -502) and
the implementing requirements of OMB Circular A -128, Audits of State and
Local Governments, and, as applicable, OMB Circular A -110, Uniform
Requirements for Grants to Universities, Hospitals and Non - Profit
Organizations.
A. The audit is to be provided to Recipient on July 1 of each year this
Agreement is in effect and any findings of noncompliance affecting the
use of CDBG funds shall be satisfied by Subrecipient within six (6)
months of the provision date.
B. The audit is not required, however, in those instances where less than
$25,000 in assistance is received from all Federal sources in any one
fiscal year.
C. The cost of the audit is not reimburseable from CDBG funds.
SUBRECIPIENT, having signed this Agreement, and the Hennepin County Board
of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on ,
19 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper County officials having
signed this Agreement, the parties - hereto agree to be bound by the provisions
herein set forth.
Upon proper execution., this
Agreement will be legally
valid And binding.
Assistant Coun y torney
Date: -/
i
APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION:
Assistant County Attorney
Date:
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Bv:
Chairman of its County Board
And:
Deputy /Associate County Administrator
Attest:
Deputy/Clerk of the County Board
SUBRECIPIENT:
By:
Its:
And:
Its
Attest:
Title:
The City is organized pursuant to:
Plan A Plan B Charter
LOCATION
Consent
MAP III. E.
LOT DIVISION
NUMBER LD -92 -2
LOCATION 6921 -23 McCauley Trail
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DRAFT MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 29, 1992
LD -92 -2 Lot Division for Existing Double Bungalow
Lot 8, Block 1, Sioux Trail 4th Addition,
6921 -23 McCauley Trail
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the proponents are
requesting a party wall division of an existing double bungalow.
The owner has received a waiver from the separate water service
requirement from the Building Board of Appeals.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends approval, subject to
recording the waiver agreement.
Commissioner McClelland moved lot division approval subject to
the staff condition of recording the waiver agreement.
COMMUNITY_ DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
APRIL 29, 1992
LD -92 -2 Lot Division.for Existing Double Bungalow
Lot 8, Block 1, Sioux Trail 4th Addition,
6921 -23 McCauley Trail
The proponents are requesting a party wall division of an
existing double bungalow. The owner has received a waiver from the
separate water service requirement from the Building Board of
Appeals.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval-, subject to recording the waiver
agreement.
ROY C. CARLSON. PRES.
10600SHERIDAN AVE. SO.
881 -4870
55431
Survey fors
Dorn Buildera. Ina.
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
` L � �
An-
miw-
LAND SURVEYORS
Licensed; Insured 8. Bonded
WILLIAM A. CARLSON, V.P.
2324 W. 110TH ST. i
888 -2084 i
55431
d
• i
f �
u•. � 1
1 r
' � � �. � � � .��1� -� � � �r � � •�� r �. -� � �� � � 111,E � •r. ,Ql
i (V =
� r
Description: Lot 8, Block 1, Sioux Trail Fourth addition
We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representatioa of a survey of the
boundaries of the land above cescribed and of the location of all buildings, if any,
thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land.
As surveyed by us this 24tho aay of May, 1971.
Minn. Rage Ho. 6648
i
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of
land:
Lot 8, Block 1, SIOUX TRAIL 4TH ADDITION, and
WHEREAS, the owner has requested the subdivision of said tract into separate
parcels (herein called "Parcels ") described as follows:
Parcel A: That part of Lot 8, Block 1, SIOUX TRAIL 4TH ADDITION, lying
north of a line drawn from a point on the west line of said Lot S.
distant 50.20 feet north of the southwest corner thereof, to a point on
the east line of said Lot 8, distant 53.57 feet north of the southeast
corner thereof and there terminating.
Parcel B: That part of Lot S. Block 1, SIOUX TRAIL 4TH ADDITION, lying
south of a line drawn from a point on the west line of said Lot 8,
distant 50.20 feet north of the southwest corner thereof, to a point on
the east line of said Lot 8, distant 53.57 feet north of the southeast
corner thereof and there terminating.
WHEREAS, the requested subdivision is authorized under Ordinance No. 801 and
it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning
Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship _and said
Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purpose of the
Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance
Nos. 825 and 804;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina
that the conveyance and ownership of the second above described Parcels as
separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions
of Ordinance Nos. 825 and 804 are hereby waived to allow said division and
conveyance thereof as separate tract of land, but only to the extent permitted
under Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 825 and subject to the limitations
set out in Ordinance No. 825 and said Ordinances are not waived for any other
Resolution
Page 2
purpose or as to any other provisions thereof, and further subject, however,
to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless
made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with
the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances.
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 Edina City Council at its
regular meeting of July 20, 1992, and as recorded in the Minutes of Said
regular meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 1st day of October, 1992.
Marcella M. Daehn
City Clerk
A. �
°
>1 '721 e '` N REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Francis J. Hoffman, City Engineer
VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5.00
DATE. 20 July, 1992
ITEM DESCRIPTION: 50th & France Skylight Canopy
Company
AGENDA ITEM y.A.
Amount of Quote or Bd
1.
C. F. Haglin & Sons Co.
$
117,700.00
2.
Architectural Contract Glass (ACG)
2.
$
125,400.00
3.
The Builders, Inc.
3.
$
136,000.00
4.
Morcon Construction, Inc.
4.
$
147,829.00
5.
5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
C. F. Haglin & Sons Co.
$ 117,700.00
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This is the bid for the canopy for the walkway located on the north side of
W. 50th Street along the east and north sides of Bellesons. I have
attached the information about this issue for your information. The
project has been delayed because the north wall on which the canopy would
sit ended up a total new building last season and as such, we had to delay
the project until now. The private properties still must make some building
adjustments prior to the installation of the canopy. The project would be
assessed against the private parties involved and the general 50th & France
Business area per the agreement. The Engineer's Estimate was $130,000.00.
gna e
The Recommended bid is
within budget not
Engineering
Finance Director
y Manager
A Ai
o ew r
�7NInM•
r /
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: HRA
From: GORDON L. HUGHES
Date: MAY 6, 19 91
Subject:
50TH & FRANCE
SKYLIGHT CANOPY
Recommendation:
Agenda item # HRA II.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends 0 To,) HRA
❑ To Council
Action Motion
❑ Resolution
�! Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Authorize plan preparation and bid solicitation for skylight
canopy-
Info/Background-
On February 19, 1991, the Council /HRA awarded contracts for the
1991 improvements to the 50th & France area. At that time, staff
advised the HRA that several miscellaneous items had not been
included in the streetscape bids. These items included improved
street signage, seasonal banners, and a skylight canopy to be
constructed east of Belleson's. With respect to the skylight
canopy, staff advised the HRA that the estimated cost.for this
work was $80,000.00. This estimate was based upon the
anticipated cost of replacing the existing fiberglass canopy with
a tinted laminated glass.
Following the streetscape bid, staff met on several occasions
with the owners of the buildings which adjoin the alleyway in
(over)
Report /Recommendation
50th & France Skylight Canopy
May 6, 1991
Page.2
question. These owners include Lund's, who owns the Belleson's .
building as well as the Peterson Edina Mall, and France Avenue
Partners, who are the owners of the building on the east side.of
the alleyway. The building owners have asked that the City
consider a more expansive skylight canopy system than that
originally envisioned. In particular, they suggest that the
skylight canopy be extended easterly from the alleyway to the
easterly edge of the Edina Mall building. This would provide a
canopy over the rear entrance to.Belleson's as well as entrances
into shops proposed for the Edina Mall building.. This expansion
nearly doubles the area which would be covered by the skylight
canopy. In addition to the expansion,.a more aggressive design
has also been advocated which would be more complementary to the
designs of the adjoining buildings and the shopping environment
which is desired.
The design changes noted above have resulted in a substantial
increase in the estimated cost of the skylight canopy. Based on
our preliminary pricing, we estimate the cost of the expanded
system to be $275,000.00 to $300,000.00. In that this represents
a substantial departure from the design and estimate presented to
the Council /HRA previously, we felt it was necessary for you to
authorize the proposed upgrade prior to proceeding to final
design and project bidding.
As originally designed, the proposed skylight canopy was to be
funded in a manner similar to all other public improvements as
part of the 50th & France project, i.e. 80 percent would be
financed through tax increment financing and 20 percent would be
assessed to all commercial properties at 50th & France. In
consideration of the expanded skylight canopy project, the
adjoining building owners have agreed to accept a special benefit
assessment equal to 50 percent of the total cost of the.canopy
skylight. Based upon the above estimate, the City's share would
be between $137,000.00 and $150,000.00 (this amount, of course,
is still subject to the'80 percent /20 percent TIF /special
assessment formula described earlier). It is proposed that the
extra benefit assessment borne by the adjoining building owners
would be spread over the same terms as the basic assessment.
MINUTES
OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MAY 6, 1991
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith and
Richards.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Motion was made by Commissioner Paulus and was
seconded by'Commissioner Rice to approve and adopt ERA Consent Agenda items as
presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF APRIL 15, 1991, APPROVED Motion vas made by Commissioner
Paulus and was seconded by Commissioner Rice to approve the HRA Minutes of April 15,
1991.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
50TH & FRANCE SKYLIGHT CANOPY DESIGN APPROVED: BIDS AUTHORIZED Executive Director
Hughes reported that on February 19, 1991, HRA /Council awarded contracts for the
1991 improvements to the 50th & France area. At that time, staff advised the HRA
that several miscellaneous items had not been included in the streetscape bids.
Those items included improved street signage, seasonal banners, and a skylight
canopy to be constructed over the alley east of Belleson's. With respect to the
skylight canopy, staff advised the HRA that the estimated cost for this work was
$80',000.00. This 'estimate was based upon the anticipated cost of replacing the
existing fiberglass canopy with a tinted laminated glass.
Following the streetscape bid, staff met on several occasions with the owners of the
buildings which adjoin the alleyway in question. These owners include Lund's, who
owns the Belleson's building as well as the Peterson Edina Mall, and France Avenue
Partners, who are the owners of the - building on the east side of the alleyway.. The.
building owners have asked that the City consider a more expansive skylight canopy
system than that originally envisioned. In particular, they suggest.that the
skylight canopy be extended westerly from the alleyway to the westerly edge of the
Edina Mall building. This would provide a canopy over the rear entrance to
Belleson's as well as entrances into shops proposed for the Edina Mall building.
This expansion would nearly double the area to be covered by the skylight canopy.
In addition to the expansion, a more aggressive design has also been advocated which
would be more complimentary to the designs of the adjoining buildings and.the
shopping environment which is desired.
The design-.changes have resulted in a substantial:-increase in the estimated cost of
the skylight canopy. Based on preliminary pricing, the estimated cost of the
expanded system would be $275,000.00 to $300,000.00. This represents a substantial
departure from the design and estimate presented to the HRA previously, and staff
felt it necessary to secure authorization for -the proposed upgrade prior to
proceeding to final design and project bidding.
Director Hughes.explained that, as originally designed, the proposed skylight canopy
was to be funded in a manner similar to all other public improvements as part of the
50th & France project, i.e., 80 percent would be financed through tax increment
financing and 20 percent would be assessed to all commercial properties at 50th &
France. In consideration of the expanded skylight canopy project, the adjoining
building owners have agreed to accept a special benefit assessment equal to 50
percent of the total cost. Based upon the above estimate, the City's share would be
between $137,000.00 and $150,000.00 (subject to the SO percent /20 percent
TIF /special assessment formula described earlier). It is proposed that the extra
benefit assessment borne by the adjoining building owners would be spread over the
same terms as the basic assessment. Staff would recommend authorization of the
preparation.and bid solicitation for the expanded skylight canopy..
Director Hughes advised that Klaus Freyinger, architect for Lund's improvements
projects and part owner of the building on the northwest corner of 50th & France,
was present to-speak to the project.
Member Smith questioned the public benefit to the overall 50th /France area of the
proposed skylight canopy. In response, Director Hughes said the benefits are
twofold. The reason for the initial canopy is maintenance and safety. The City's
experience with narrow alleyways has been that they are prone to wind, weather and
the accumulation of snow /ice. The expansion could provide some unique and
attractive public areas for outdoor dining, etc. It also could suggest the start of
a long -term design theme for the 50th & France area that could be applied to other
areas. In particular, the alleyway along the Edina Theater would be suitable for a
similar type of canopy, if and when the shops to the west are redeveloped with a
larger building.
In response to questions of Member Paulus, Director Hughes said the assessment for
the original project was estimated at approximately $2 /square foot of floor area
throughout the 50th & France area,. The special benefit assessment would approximate
an additional $1 /square foot of floor.area. The cost of the skylight canopy is
driven up by added area coverage and the design (added height, volume and vertical
element). If the property to the west of the Edina Theater were to redevelop, it is
expected that such major redevelopment would produce additional increment to cover
costs if the canopy design were expanded to that alleyway. Judgement would have to
be reserved until then because the laws relating to tax increment financing could
change.
Member Smith asked what the private benefit would be to the adjoining properties.
Director Hughes recalled that when Lund's presented renovation plans for their
properties, the plans showed retail storefronts along the blank wall of the Edina
Mall. The creation of those storefronts under canopy would be the principal amenity
from a private standpoint.
Member Rice asked about the durability and maintenance.of laminated glass and also
if staff felt the 50/50 cost split was appropriate. Director Hughes said the glass
would be weatherproof/hailproof. If there was malicious damage to the canopy the
actual repair would be the City's responsibility. However, it would be considered
extraordinary maintenance and the cost would be assessed back to the 50th & France
properties on an annual basis. As to the cost split, Director Hughes said he felt
that was appropriate and reasonable.
Mayor Richards then called for public comment on the skylight canopy project as
proposed. No comment or objections were heard.
Commissioner Smith made a motion to authorize final plan preparation and bid
solicitation for the expanded skylight canopy as presented. Motion was seconded by
Commissioner Kelly.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice; Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
*BID AWARDED - CHAIRS - CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK CENTRUM Motion was made by
Commissioner Paulus and was seconded by Commissioner Rice for award of bid for
chairs for the Centennial Lakes Park Centrum to recommended low bidder, REM
Supplies, at $8,250.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
*CLAIMS PAID Motion was made by Commissioner Paulus and was seconded by
Commissioner Rice to approve payment of the following HRA claims as shown in detail
on the Check Register dated 5/6/91, and consisting of one page totalling,
$123,990.97.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, Chairman Richard declared the
meeting adjourned. /
Director
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Francis Hoffman, City'Engineer
VIA: Kenneth Rosland City Manager
SUBJECT. REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5.000
DATE 20 July, 1992
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Ramp Repair - Three Ramps
Company
1 Progressive Contractors, Inc.
2. Restoration Technologies, Inc.
3. Western Waterproofing, Inc.
4. Paragon Constructors, Inc.
5,- D: H. Blattner &Sons, -Inc.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
Progressive Contractors, Inc.
AGENDA ITEM y. B.
$ 45,825.00
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This project is to do parking ramp repair work on the middle ramp
behind Twin City Federal between W. 50th St. & W. 49+) Street and
traffic topping on the south ramp by Lunds ( Lunds level) and on
the ramp behind Jerry's Food Stores located south of Vernon and
west of the Soo Line railroad tracks. The project will be funded
thru the capital plan and the Engineer's Estimate was $60,380.00.
Engineering
The Recommended bid is x
within budget not within but oin Wallin, Fin nce Director
Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
Amount of Quote or Bid
1.
$
45,825.00
2.
$
53,672.50
3.
$
55,482.00
4.
$
59,485.00
5 -.
$
65,295.00- -
$ 45,825.00
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This project is to do parking ramp repair work on the middle ramp
behind Twin City Federal between W. 50th St. & W. 49+) Street and
traffic topping on the south ramp by Lunds ( Lunds level) and on
the ramp behind Jerry's Food Stores located south of Vernon and
west of the Soo Line railroad tracks. The project will be funded
thru the capital plan and the Engineer's Estimate was $60,380.00.
Engineering
The Recommended bid is x
within budget not within but oin Wallin, Fin nce Director
Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Francis Hoffman, City Engineer
VIA: Kenneth Rosland City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5.000
DATE: 20 July, 1992
AGENDA ITEM V . C .
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Concrete Sidewalk - Thielen
Avenue
Company
Amount of Quote or &d
1.
Gunderson Bros. Cement Contr. Co., Inc.
1
$ 13,043.75
2.
Advanced Concrete, Inc.
2.
$ 13,796.75
3.
Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc.
3.
$ 14,512.50
4.
Minnesota State Curb & Gutter
4.
$152,265.70*
5.
J
5.
*Math Error
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
Gunderson Bros. Cement Contr. Co., Inc. $ 13,043.75
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This bid is for the sidewalk repair and tree replacement program
on Thielen Avenue. The Engineer's Estimate was $11,319.25.
Funding for this project will be thru special assessment.
ign
The Recommended bid is
X
within budget not
Engineering
Department
Director
Kenneth Rosland, City
I
VI (A)
MINUTES.
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
JULY 14, 1992
9:00 A.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Fran Hoffman, Chairman
Gordon Hughes
Craig Swanson
Alison Fuhr
Robert Sherman
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Ms. Marjorie Peter, 6305 Ridgeview Drive
Mr. Bill Belanger, 3330 Edinborough Way
Ms. Florence Crauch, 3330 Edinborough Way
Mr. Ron Cornwell, 4905 Browndale Avenue
STAFF PRESENT: Deputy Chief Leonard Kleven, Edina P.D.
Mr. Eric Felton, Edina P.D.
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 West 63rd Street and Ridgeview
Drive.
Request received from John Peter, 6305 Ridgeview Drive.
ACTION TAKEN:
Mr. Kleven reported that speed was not a problem in the area of
West 63rd Street and Ridgeview Drive,. and that there was.no
accident history in the area. Marjorie Peter, a.resident of.
Ridgeview Drive, appeared before the Committee on behalf of
herself and her husband. She presented their concerns regarding
the 90- degree curve at Ridgeview Drive where West 63rd Street
parallels the Crosstown Highway. She stated there was no warning
of the curve for the westbound to southbound traffic, and that
vehicles were apt to cross the "invisible" middle line and cut
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
July 14, 1992
Page 2
into the oncoming lanes, presenting a danger to vehicles backing
out of driveways and also to children playing in the area. Mr.
Hoffman stated that the roadway was not striped, and asked Ms.
Peter whether striping a centerline would help keep vehicles from
straying. She said what she had in mind was a "WATCH FOR
CHILDREN" sign or rumble strips similar to those that had been
installed at West 63rd Street and Warren Avenue. Mr. Hoffman
reminded Ms. Peter of the noise generated by rumble strips, and
asked how the neighbors might react to the noise. She didn't
believe it would be a problem.. When Mr. Hoffman questioned how
the neighbors would react to striping, which he stated residents
sometimes did not like as it can give the impression of a busier
street, she wasn't sure. Mr. Hughes noted that the curve is
currently indicated by an "ARROW" sign.
Mr. Hughes moved to recommend the current signage be upgraded to
indicate a right -angle curve, coupled with a 20- mile -per hour
advisory and centerline striving for a short distance. Mrs. Fuhr
seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 -0.
(2) Request for "SIGNAL YOUR TURN ". sign at southbound Metro Boulevard
and West 72nd Street.
Request received from Sharyn McDonald, 3101 Dakota Avenue South,
St. Louis Park.
ACTION TAKEN:
Mr. Swanson moved to recommend the installation of a "SIGNAL YOUR
TURN" sign for southbound traffic at Metro Boulevard and West 72nd
Street. Mrs. Fuhr seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mr. Hoffman asked for a clarification as
to which traffic lane would be affected by "SIGNAL YOUR TURN"
signage. Discussion followed, and it was clarified that the
signage would affect traffic in the southbound right -hand lane,
not the left -lane traffic.
Mr. Hoffman then called for a vote on the original motion. The
motion carried 5 -0.
SECTION B:
Requests on which the Committee recommends denial of request.
None.
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
July 14, 1992
Page 3
SECTION C
Requests which are deferred to a later date or referred to others.
(1) Request to upgrade the intersection of York Avenue. South and
Edinborough Way to a permanent four -way "STOP."
Petition received from 43 residents at Edina Park Plaza and
Brookstone Real Estate Services, 3300 Edinborough Way.
ACTION TAKEN:
Mr. Hoffman reported that this issue had been forwarded to the
Hennepin County Department of Public Works for review, as York
Avenue is a County roadway.. Mr. Dennis Hanson,. Hennepin County
Transportation Planning Engineer, responded by conducting a 16-
hour vehicular and pedestrian turning movement study, and
reviewing the accident record of the intersection from 1988
through 1990 [see attached letter]. Based on those studies, he
responded that the County'could.not recommend the installation of
a permanent four -way "STOP" sign as traffic volumes and safety
conditions did not meet warrants. Mr. Hanson's study concluded
that the intersection met only one peak hour warrant (4:30 -5:30
P.M.). Mr.. Hughes asked if that meant the City could not
unilaterally impose a traffic control of its own on the County
legs, and Mr. Hoffman stated that was correct.
Mr. Bill Belanger, General Manger of Edina Park Plaza, was in
attendance and presented his concerns his and those of the Edina
Park Plaza residents. He stated there were several factors
contributing to the need for control at the intersection: (1) A
three -block stretch on southbound York.Avenue before Edinborough
Way without "STOP" signs allows vehicles to speed up; (2) The
intersection is wide, making it difficult to make a left -hand turn
onto York Avenue during heavy traffic; (3) Motorists tend to
accelerate around the curve at Edinborough Way; the curve also
impedes the view looking north to south; (4) Edina Park Plaza
houses 230 senior residents, approximately 100 of whom have
automobiles; and '(5) Traffic volume in the area has increased due
to additional traffic from the Hawthorne Suites Hotel, Centennial
Lakes, and a day care center within the Plaza. Mr. Hoffman asked
whether the bridge accident on 494 and the subsequent placement of
a temporary four -way "STOP" at York Avenue and Edinborough Way had
been the.impetus for Mr. Belanger's request to make such a .
solution permanent. Mr..Belanger stated that the idea had been
discussed before the accident, but that they had found the four -
way "STOP" to be a good solution to their everyday traffic
concerns. Mr. Hoffman stated'his belief that because of the
current signalization on the south (Bloomington) side of the
bridge, the County would not want another signal light that close
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
July 14, 1992
Page 4
together. Mr. Swanson asked if there were future plans to alter
York Avenue based on the Interstate 494 situation. Mr. Hoffman
said that York Avenue is not scheduled for any changes. He
suggested that the Committee's position might be to ask the County
to,look at both sides of the bridge, and determine their long -
range plans for the area.
Mr. Swanson moved to request that the County review both ends of
the bridge intersections at this point and put it into their
planning process. Mrs. Fuhr seconded the motion..
Mrs. Fuhr amended the motion to read as follows: To reauest that
the Countv review both ends of the bridge intersections at this
Doint and to encourage them to Dut it into their Dlanning Drocess
as quickly as possible. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hoffman.
Motion carried 5 -0.
(2) Discuss traffic safety concerns at Browndale Bridge,.north of West
50th Street.
Request received from Ron Cornwell, 4905 Browndale Avenue.
ACTION TAKEN:
Mr. Cornwell appeared before the Committee to express his concerns
over the volume of traffic over the Browndale Bridge in and out of
the County Club neighborhood. It is his belief that many of the
motorists are not residents; they are using Browndale as an
alternative to taking Highway 100 to Excelsior Boulevard. He
further stated that the problem was particularly noticeable in the
4:00 -6:OO P.M. time period. In his opinion one solution might be
to make Browndale-Avenue one -way for outbound traffic between
Country Club Road and West 50th Street. Mr. Hoffman reported he
had been informed that a petition from a second group of
neighborhood residents was forthcoming, but had not been received
in time for consideration at this particular meeting. He said the
Committee had last considered the Browndale Bridge issue in 1980,
although no action was taken at that time. According to Mr.
Hoffman, plans have been in the works to look at the whole
Browndale. Bridge issue, encompassing possible bridge redesign and
traffic flow alternatives, during the upcoming winter months. Mr.
Hoffman said the current bridge is 18 -1/2 feet wide, an inadequate
width for two -lane traffic. Mr. Swanson compared the issue of
traffic "cutting through" on Browndale Avenue to similar problems
being experienced elsewhere in the City (Tracy Avenue, for
example). Mr. Hoffman said there are various solutions available
that at some point should be presented to the neighborhood
association for their input; i.e., establishing a one -way traffic
pattern, prohibiting turns during specific.time frames, etc.
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
July 14, 1992
Page 5
Mr. Cornwell asked whether traffic volume had increased much in
the past twenty years.. Mr. Hoffman replied that volume on
Browndale had always been pretty high at 2,000 -3,000 cars per day.
Mr. Kleven said that one accident had been reported in the area
during the past three years, resulting from vehicles driving too
close to the median. Mr. Swanson asked Mr. Hoffman for his time
line on the bridge study. Mr. Hoffman said the feasibility.study
had only just begun, and was at the point of collecting data in-
house. He didn't anticipate bridge construction beginning until
1994 at the earliest, if a project is approved.
Mrs. Fuhr moved to continue this issue until August for further
discussion. Mr. Sherman seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 -0.
Mr. Hoffman announced that he would not be present at the August
meeting of the Traffic Safety Committee, and that. reopened
discussion on the Browndale Bridge issue. Mr. Hughes expressed
his concerns that this is very much an Engineering Department
issue, and that without Mr. Hoffman available to answer specific
engineering questions, a discussion of this topic in August may
not be productive. Discussion followed on the question of hiring
a consultant to study the situation, in order to have specific
information available to present at a future Committee meeting.
Mr. Hughes moved to rescind Mrs. Fuhr's original motion. Mrs.
Fuhr seconded.
Mr. Hughes moved to recommend consideration by the City Council
that a traffic consultant be hired to study preliminary traffic
flows through the Country Club district for the purpose of
Dresentine a revort to the Traffic Safety Committee in the fall.
Mrs. Fuhr seconded.
Mr. Hoffman called for a vote on the motion to rescind, which
carried 5 -0. Mr. Hoffman then called for a vote on Mr. Hughes'
second motion, which also carried 5 -0.
Edina Traffic Safety Committee
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
320 Washington Avenue South
HENNEPIN Hopkins, Minnesota. 55343 -8468
PHONE.: (612) 930 -2500
FAX (612) 930 -2513
TDD: (612) 930 -2696
July 8, 1992
Leonard Kleven, Deputy Chief
Edina Police Department
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424 -1394
RE: CSAH 31 (York Avenue) and Edinborough Way
Traffic Control
Dear Deputy Chief Kleven:
As requested in your letter of June 3, 1992, our department has reviewed the
intersection of CSAH 31 (York Avenue) and Edinborough Way for appropriate
intersection control. Interested intersection users have petitioned that the
temporary four way stop become the permanent intersection control after the
bridge damage on the York Avenue bridge over I494 is repaired.
Our investigation included conducting a 16 hour vehicular and pedestrian
turning movement study between the hours of 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM on a typical
weekday and reviewing the accident record of the intersection from 1988.
through 1990. Copies of these studies are enclosed..
The results of the 16 hour study showed that traffic volumes fell somewhat
below the requirements for a multiway stop. Those requirements are outlined
in the "1991 Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices ". A copy of
those requirements is attached.
The 16 hour study results were also compared to the traffic signal warrants as
outlined in.that. same document. Only one signal warrant was met. That was
Warrant No. 11, Peak Hour Volume, which was achieved during the afternoon peak
hour (4:30 -5:30 PM).
During the three year period of 1988 -90 six accidents occurred at this
intersection - three in 1988,. one in 1989, and two in 1990. This information
was obtained from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety. Records of the
Edina Police Department indicate only one accident in 1991.
This results in a three year (1988 -90) accident rate of 0.36 accidents per
million vehicles using the intersection (acc /MV) as compared to a county
average of 0.77 acc /MV for this type of intersection.
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an equal opportunity employer
Leonard Kleven
July 8, 1992
Page 2 -
Based on this data we cannot recommend that a four way stop be permanently
placed at the York Avenue and Edinborough Way intersection. Traffic volumes
and safety conditions cannot justify the more stringent control.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, or. should additional
data be necessary, please contact me at 930 -2674.
'ncerely,
Dennis L. Hansen, P.E.
Transportation Planning Engineer
DLH:gk
Attachments
cc: Fran Hoffman, City of Edina
Patrick B. Murphy
e '0
o 4
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor Richards and City Counci:
From: Bob Koj etin
Date: July 16, 1992
Subject: Braemar Golf Course -
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #
VI.
B.
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr. Recommends .
❑
To HRA
El
To Council '
Action
0
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
Mr. Herring MOVED TO REAFFIRM THE PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY
COUNCIL FROM THE APRIL 26, 1988 PARK BOARD MEETING. Pat Vagnoni SECONDED
THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Info /Background:
Enclosed is the Park Board minutes and the motion of the Park Board's
reviewal of the Braemar Golf Course report..
Recommendation from the Apzil 26, 1988 Park Board Meeting
Jim Fee MOVED TO APPROVE THE ENTIRE BRAEMAR PARK PROPOSAL WHICH INCLUDES
THE PAVILION REMODELING, THE GOLF DOME PURCHASE, THE BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
EXPANSION AND IMPROVEMENTS AS PRESENTED BY KEN ROSLAND. ..THIS MOTION IS
NOT TO INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION OF ANEW GYMNASTICS FACILITY AT THIS•TIME,
HOWEVER, THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDS FURTHER STUDY IN SUPPORT OF A.FUTURE
GYMNASTICS FACILITY. Don Wineberg SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
EDINA PARK BOARD
8:30 p.m.
July 14, 1992
Manager's Conference Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Lord, Andrew Montgomery, Jim Fee,.Andrew Herring, Pat
Vagnoni, Bill Jenkins, Bob Christianson, Beth Hall, Jean
Rydell
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mac Thayer, Paul O'Connor
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Kojetin, John Keprios, Janet Canton
OTHERS PRESENT: None
I. APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 9. 1992 MINUTES
Jean Rydell MOVED TO APPROVE THE JUNE 9, 1992 MINUTES. Beth Hall SECONDED
THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED.
II. REVIEW OF THE NEV NINE HOLES AT BRAENAR GOLF COURSE, WHICH WAS APPROVED
AT THE APRIL 26, 1988 PARK BOARD MEETING.
Mr. Christianson stated that this meeting is to review and reapprove the
new 9 hole golf course at Braemar which was originally approved at the
April 26, 1988 meeting. Mr. Christianson noted that Bob Kojetin sent out a
chronological restitution of what has transpired prior to now.
Mr. Kojetin stated that people in the community have been writing to the
City Council and calling the City and Braemar Golf Course about the new
nine hole golf course. They want to know how far the city is. going into
the wetlands and walking path. The City Council has suggested that this
topic come to the Park Board for reviewal because some of the Park Board
members were not on the Park Board when the original recommendation was
passed three years ago. This gives the Park Board members and anyone in
the audience an opportunity to express concerns and ask questions and have
the Park Board reapprove the project again. This will again be reviewed at
the City Council meeting on Monday, July 20, 1992.
Mr. Kojetin handed out a special report that has been updated from the last
special report of. the Normandale Golf Course. Mr. Kojetin reviewed the
changes of the report.
Mr. Kojetin noted that the Normandale Golf Course was approved at the July
6, 1992 City Council.meeting. The biggest concern of everyone is the
proposed building that could possibly be built on.the South Side. Mr.
Kojetin noted the following terms for the proposal for purchase:
Terms -
a. The city would remove the existing structure from the approximately
6.2 acres fronting on West 77th Street (the "Acreage ").
b. Seller would have an option to reacquire the Acreage for a period
of fifteen (15) years at an option price of $1.00.
C. If Seller reacquires the Acreage and if the contingencies described
are fully satisfied, the City would amend its Comprehensive
Plan to show use of the Acreage as Planned Office Development, and
a building height restriction of 39 feet, and the Seller would
prepare and file, at Seller's expense, any required plat or
registered land survey.
d. If Seller does not reacquire the Acreage, the option will expire
and the City will issue a resolution for the value of the Acreage
at that time as a gift from Seller.
e. During the 15 year option period, the City will maintain the
Acreage and neither the Seller nor any other person or party shall
have the right to use the Acreage for any purpose unless agreed to
and approved by the City.
Mr. Kojetin noted the differences from the original proposal. The City
will build a clubhouse and will purchase 31 acres, not 26 acres. Mr.
Kojetin then indicated on a map what the layout of the Normandale Golf
Course will look like.
Ms. Hall asked how many stories are 39 feet? It was noted that it would be
approximately three stories.
Mr. Jenkins asked who is designing Normandale Golf Course and Braemar Golf
Course? Mr. Kojetin noted that Mr. Goldstrand is designing Normandale and
Mr. Pirkl is designing the new nine hole at Braemar Golf Course.
Mr. Montgomery asked if a new site has been determined for an adult
softball field when the Lake Edina fields are taken out? Mr. Keprios
indicated that they have been looking at different parks to make an adult
softball field_ with a fence. At this time there is no recommendation for a
location.
Mr. Kojetin handed out a special report that has been updated from the last
special report of Braemar Golf Course. Mr. Kojetin reviewed the plans of
the new nine holes at Braemar Golf Course and some of the changes from the
original plan. He noted that holes 17 and 18 are two that have been
changed in the plans.
Mr. Montgomery asked about the walking path. Mr. Kojetin pointed out the
possible new route of the path and how it would go along the'south side of
Braemar and north along Gleason to Dewey Hill. This would then make .a
complete circle path around Braemar.
Mr. Montgomery asked why are so many people against the new nine'hole golf
course going in, is it just because of the wetlands. Mr. Kojetin stated
that is basically the reason. Mr. Lord felt that people do not understand
what is totally happening. He noted that the City created the wetlands,
when the golf course was initially started it was just farm land. Now the
2
1
city is redistributing the wetlands and after mitigation it has almost
doubled from 4 acres to 7 acres and people don't realize.this. Mr. Lord
feels there is basically a lack of communication.
Mr. Christianson noted there was no one in the audience to voice any
concerns.
Mr. Fee stated that it looks like persistence has paid off:
Mr. Herring MOVED TO REAFFIRM THE PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY
COUNCIL FROM THE APRIL 26, 1988 PARK BOARD MEETING. Pat Vagnoni SECONDED
.THE MOTION. MOTION.CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
III. APPOINTEE TO COMMUNITY EDUCATION SERVICES
Ms. Rydell indicated that she would like to continue to serve on the
Community Education Services Board. Bill Jenkins.MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE
CITY COUNCIL THAT JEAN RYDELL CONTINUE AS THE LIAISON TO THE COMMUNITY
EDUCATION SERVICES BOARD. Beth Hall SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
Jean Rydell MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:05 P.M. Bob Christianson
SECONDED THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED.
r
3
SPECIAL EDINA PARK BOARD MEETING
7:30 p.m.
April 26, 1988
Edina City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Christianson, Bill Lord, Jim Fee, Bill Jenkins, Andrew
Montgomery, Don Wineberg
MEMBERS ABSENT: Itti Furlong, James Moe, Jean Rydell, Mac Thayer
STAFF PRESENT: Ken Rosland, Bob Kojetin, John Keprios, Bill Bach, John
Valliere, Larry Thayer
OTHERS PRESENT: Stephen Smith, President, Edina Hockey Association; Pam
Moody,.President, Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club;.
_ Roger Harold, Braemar Golfer; Anne Maguire, Edina Gymnastics
Association; William Lund, President, Edina Gymnastics
Association; Art Katzman, Edina Gymnastics Association; Tass
vonSchmidt -Paul, Braemar Men's. Club; Frank Garrison, Braemar
Men's Club; Erling Grealey, Braemar Men's Club; Cora Jane
Blanchard, Braemar Women's Club; Jim Blanchard, Braemar
Men's Club; Ed Howat, Edina Hockey Association; Dick
Maguire, Edina Gymnastics Association.
Bob Christianson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Bob Christianson welcomed new member Bill Jenkins to the Edina Park Board and
thanked him for his willingness to serve the community.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 8. 1988
Don Wineberg MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 8, 1988, MEETING.
Jim Fee seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
II. - BRAEMAR PARK REORGANIZATION AND UPGRADING PROPOSAL
Ken Rosland gave a presentation the Braemar Park reorganization and
upgrading proposal. Mr. Rosland explained that there are four major
aspects to the Braemar Park proposal:
1. Repair and upgrade the Braemar Pavilion to ensure a reliable
energy- efficient sheet of ice to be operational.by October 1, 1988.
2. Purchase the Edina Golf Dome., to be managed by John Valliere, in
order to produce a positive cash flow for the proposed Braemar Park
fund.
3. Braemar Golf Course expansion and improvements to include:
add a 9 -hole, 3,000 yard course to the existing 18 -hole
Championship course
- construct a new building to replace the existing A -frame building
- increase the size of the parking lot
construct a new golf car shelter
- purchase 20 new golf cars
- replace roof on old section of the club -house
4. Construct a new gymnastics facility adjacent to the Braemar Pavilion.
Mr. Rosland explained the need for each project in detail:
Braemar Golf Course
There currently is more demand for golf at Braemar than can be met.
Roughly 250 golfers per day are turned away because of the high demand.
It is projected that within ten years the demand for golf will be
considerably greater. To respond to this demand.as well as produce an
additional positive cash flow, an additional 9 hole course is proposed at
a projected capital expenditure of $900,000. Although 60% of the
proposed course would be in a designated flood plain, engineers and
9 -mile Watershed District officials have approved the proposal. This
3,000 yard course would not affect the existing 18 -.hole championship
course. With the addition of the 9 -hole course, there will be a need
for:
-a larger parking lot (535 spaces) $275,000
-20 new golf cars 50,000
-more golf car storage 50,000
To keep up with the increasing demand for golf, there will also be a need
for:
-new building (replace A- frame) $150,000
- club -house energy upgrade 25,000
The total golf course expansion and improvements is projected to cost
$1,450,000.
Golf Dome
The Edina Golf Dome has been managed for the past two years by John
Valliere. Figures have shown the potential for an excellent positive
cash flow. 1987 figures show an actual operating income (after
depreciation) of $111,000. The Edina Golf Dome could be a large asset to
the proposed Braemar Park fund and would provide a means of financing
Braemar Park fund losses without having to use general tax dollars. The
purchase price is $575,000.
Braemar Pavilion
The present mechanical refrigeration system including the floor,
refrigeration equipment and cooling tower are all in need of
replacement. It is no longer financially feasible to repair the damaged
equipment. The proposal is to construct a sand floor, energy- efficient,
year- around sheet of artificial ice to be operational by October 1,
1988. This proposal includes the addition of much needed bleachers,
locker rooms toilet facilities, and -a commons area. The total renovation
of the Braemar Pavilion is projected to be $1,500,000. The proposal
includes the extension of Braemar Boulevard as a state -aid road around
the Braemar Arena parking lot. The most timely need in the entire
Braemar Park proposal is the'need for a reliable sheet of artificial ice
to replace the currently inoperable Braemar Pavilion.
Gymnastics Building
Currently the Edina Gymnastics Association is leasing warehouse space in
Edina for $55,000 a year and are not able to meet the growing demand in
Edina for the sport of gymnastics. The E.G.A. is also anticipating an
increase in demand in the near future. For future planning purposes, it
is suggested that the Edina Park Board work with the E.G.A. to address
the possibility of constructing a gymnastics facility at Braemar to meet
these demands and secure a long -term facility for the program. The
gymnastics building is not part of the proposed #3,525,000 plan for
Braemar Park.
Financial Package
Mr. Rosland explained that the total package.is estimated at $3,525,000.
The project would be.financed by 20 year revenue bonds at a projected
seven and one -half percent interest or better. The proposal includes the
use of joint management at Braemar Park and the establishment of a
Braemar Park fund to include:
- Braemar Arena /Pavilion
- Braemar Golf Course
-Brian Wippermann Memorial Gun Range
-Edina Golf Dome
- Braemar Baseball Complex
- Braemar Park (General Park Area)
Summary
Mr. Rosland summarized the utmost importance.to move on the replacement
of the Braemar Pavilion equipment. The City Council has the authority to
sell revenue bonds to fund this entire project. If necessary, the
refrigeration equipment could be replaced independent of the other
proposed improvements, however, it would be financially beneficial to
approve the entire project.
Question /Comments from the Park Board
Jim Fee asked why the purchase of the Edina Golf dome is important. Mr.
Rosland replied that under the current projections the Edina Golf Dome
would potentially produce a $120,000 positive cash flow. Bill Lord asked
about the accuracy of the Golf Dome figures. Mr. Rosland explained that
the past two years were managed by John Valliere and that the stated
figures are actual. Bob Christianson asked why the owner of the Golf
Dome wants to sell it. Mr. Rosland explained that the current owner no
longer has an interest in managing the facility. Bill Lord asked about
the $575,000 asking price. Mr. Rosland explained "that he personally
negotiated this price and that he is very comfortable with the
agreement. Bob Christianson asked about the 15 year lease agreement. It
was explained that the Edina Golf Dome Associates were obligated to a 15
year lease which could be dissolved upon purchase by the City. Don
Wineberg asked "about the life expectancy of the Dome. Ken replied that
it is expected to last between 15 and 20 years. Now that the Dome is not
taken down annually, the structure may have a longer life expectancy.
Bob Christianson asked how the purchase of the Normandale Golf Course
compares to the Braemar proposal. Mr. Rosland explained that the Braemar
proposal is far superior financially. It was mentioned that the demand .
for indoor ice in Edina exceeds what two rinks can provide.
Questions /Comments from Guest
Dale Lund, President of Edina Gymnastics Association:
- E.G.A. would like to explore the possibility of getting out of existing
.5 year lease.
-The E.G.A. has over 900 children
accommodate demand, plus, demand
- E.G.A. is in need of a long term
- E.G.A. is willing to explore the
debt on a new facility.
in their program and presently cannot
is expected to grow.
facility.
possibility of paying off the capital
Ed Howat, Past President Edina Hockey Association
-A committee was established in-1985 to explore the possibility of
constructing a new ice.facility.
-The E.H.A. needs a second sheet of reliable indoor ice that is
functional by October 1, 1988.
-He supports the entire project and understands the additional needs for
financing.
-Would like.to see an enlarged gymnastics facility to enhance the hockey
program (weight rooms, exercise rooms, etc.)
-The focus of this entire project should be to'secure a second sheet of
reliable energy- efficient indoor ice by October 1, 1988.
Stephen Smith, President Edina Hockey Association
There.is a.great deal of high anxiety amongst hockey parents for fear of
not knowing if there will be a second sheet of ice by October 1, 1988.
-The Edina Hockey Association concurs with Ed Howat's statements.
-The E.H.A. enrolls over 700 children annually and administer four
tournaments per year.
Roger Harold, Braemar Golfer
- Without the Pavilion problems, there still exists a tremendous demand
for golf in Edina.
-He is concerned that future improvements and concerns for the golf
course will not be met because the golf course .revenues will be tied
into other facilities' debts.
Jim Fee MOVED TO APPROVE THE ENTIRE BRAEMAR PARK PROPOSAL WHICH INCLUDES
THE PAVILION REMODELING, THE GOLF DOME PURCHASE, THE BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
EXPANSION AND IMPROVEMENTS AS PRESENTED BY KEN ROSLAND. THIS MOTION IS
NOT TO INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW GYMNASTICS FACILITY AT THIS TIME,
HOWEVER, THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDS FURTHER STUDY IN SUPPORT. OF A FUTURE
GYMNASTICS FACILITY. Don Wineberg seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
III. OTHER-
Bob Christianson commented on an invitation received from Hennipen County
Parks to tour their parks June 1. A letter in regard to this will tie,
sent out to all Park Board Members.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
Bill Lord MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 9:20 p.m. Jim Fee seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL:
Jim Fee MOVED TO APPROVE THE ENTIRE BRAEMAR PARK PROPOSAL WHICH INCLUDES
THE PAVILION REMODELING, THE GOLF DOME PURCHASE, THE BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
EXPANSION AND IMPROVEMENTS AS PRESENTED BY KEN ROSLAND. THIS MOTION IS
NOT TO INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW GYMNASTICS FACILITY AT THIS TIME,
HOWEVER, THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDS FURTHER STUDY IN SUPPORT OF A FUTURE
GYMNASTICS FACILITY. Don Wineberg seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Braemar Golf Association
6364 Dewey Hill Road
Edina. Minnesota 55439
July 15, 1992
To: Mayor Fred Richards
Members of City Council
City of Edina
From Roger Harrold
President
Braemar Golf Association
AGENDA ITEM VI.B
Re: Proposed Development of Nine -hole Addition to Braemar Golf Course
At its July 1, 1992 meeting, the Board of the Braemar Golf Association voted unanimously to
endorse the development of the new nine at Braemar and urges City Council to vote in
favor of this project at its July 20, 1992 meeting. The Board and the Association represent
golfers in the many leagues at Braemar, Patron Card holders, and golfers at large. It is our
observation that the overwhelming proportion of golfers at Braemar support the
development of the new nine.
There are a number of compelling reasons to move forward with this project. Permit me to
summarize several reasons.
1. Play on the 18 -hole course is filled to overflowing. The number of golfers wishing
to play at Braemar. on the average summer day exceeds capacity by about 250.
Annual sales of patron cards is now 2,250, and it is getting increasingly difficult for
the patron card holder to get a tee time on weekends. For example, the patron card
holder with less than four patron card holders in his /her foursome who wishes to
schedule golf for a foursome on Sunday may schedule four days in advance
(Wednesday) starting at 7:00am. If that person doesn't get through by phone or
through the waiting line at Braemar before 7:20am, there will not likely be any
times remaining for an 18 -hole round on Sunday. The reactions range from
frustration to anger. Building the new nine will alleviate much of the current
pre ssure for tee times by Edina residents.
2. By moving from an 18 -hole to a 27 -hole full- length golf course, Braemar will
achieve optimum scheduling efficiency. It is well known in the golf course industry
that 27 holes (three nines) will accommodate more than the 50 percent increase in
number of holes. It is estimated that moving from 18 to 27 holes results in a 60-66
percent increase in number of rounds actually played.
3. The City of Edina has given special attention to the environmental impact of
constricting the new nine. It has explored every reasonable alternative to avoid or
minimize negative impacts. It has made design concessions to respond to
environmental concerns. It has proposed means to mitigate wetlands areas so that
no net loss to wetlands occurs. The areas affected are extremely small in acreage.
The proposed new nine has worked its way through review and approval agencies
such as the Nine Mile Creek Watershed, the DNR and finally the Corps of Engineers
with Corps acceptance on June 5, 1992.
4. A motion of a former City Council several years ago approved action to move ahead
with this project. This demonstrates a conviction on the part of the city that a need
for the new nine exists.
5. The Braemar Golf Course Complex is the most successful recreational enterprise in
the City of Edina. The number of rounds of golf played on the 18 -hole course and
Executive Course total approximately 85,000 per year. The driving range is busy
from daybreak to dusk. Its group lesson program attracts more than 1,000
participants each year.
6. Braemar Golf Course is the recreational outlet for thousands of Edina residents. Golf
is a lifelong, family -oriented sport which responds to the interests of juniors as well
as senior citizens. The proposed expansion is needed to continue to successfully
fulfill the recreational interests of Edina residents.
The City of Edina has a tradition and reputation of being a forward looking community. We
feel this proposed addition to Braemar will advance the city's recreational resources through
the 90s and into the 21st century. We urge approval by the City Council at its July 20, 1992
meeting.
0 USPS 1991
� rf
i6 JUL v )
✓ /992 /�'� 4_
USA 19
�0 v
L p AKA CCTY
W • 5 7/z e-r7
No y Gc�.r c,uuTtSC -•5
pots T�tt QrrY c r L�Dii�•�
gj- Lip
RL��N G ,9 Sec= O re Ge =t1
M 19Cr�rG Rr,Siiv.�:55
'TrfL' P2a PITS d u
or- 6oLFrNG c►oc•Izs�S ?
TKT'A L- R - sr�
Rr 6T ouR L feet &-D
v N T ►� �� �� r e r ry
R`sP�L-5&AI rA 4 � ?T, py�� =s
C oared i L- - 'y av
D &W
L-Vew 4-1
r� I? L9N
�
T °
L�1V �/ ! R.O id •._
P'� d L�FiLrS
Bve D 4 wya�rc: W t p
pL�yH c+d_rr T°
u b -5M w
Te 13 e,c e,-
5 P��.o M <<�irso � c�rt✓�rwev
,5 KD rfaw5 t AS aiv AKn
G ctr' FS pONv 14
nr /�
P C^�
L D i 4' dL F�.s
& OF
5 -75- _ H
IZLS r0 7`S
C
y r
'r
G R v v pp.5 Lt—T TM c'
� �t'TP6.t "ry 5 P L 191 f
I
t
e
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: COUNCIL MEMBERS
From: FRED RICHARDS , MAYOR
Date. JULY 16, 1992
Subject: APPOINTMENTS TO CO11MUNIT
EDUCATION SERVICES BOARD
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #
VI.c
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
❑
To Council
Action
7
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Reappointment of Jean Rydell (Park Board representative) and Glenn Smith (Council
representative) to the Community Education Services Board, subject to consent of
the Council.
Info %Background
Terms on the Community Education Services Board are for one year (7 /1"to 6/30).
Current members are:
Glenn Smith (Council representative)
Jean Rydell (Park Board representative)
Jan Homberger (Council member -at -large appointee)
At its meeting of July 14, 1992, the Park Board recommended that Jean Rydell
be reappointed. The attached letter from Jan Homberger indicates that she does
not wish to be reappointed so a vacancy will exist for that position. I would
appreciate names of potential appointees.
July 16, 1992
Frederick S. Richards, Mayor
4801 W. 50th St.
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Richards:
Thank you for your invitation to reappoint me for
another term of service on the Community Services
Board as the City Council's appointed member at large.
I'm sorry to say that I don't wish to continue for
another term as I feel that someone else would probably
be a more productive representative than I have been.
My understanding is that I will continue to serve until
a replacement is found.
Sincerely yours,
"an Homberger
cc: Doug Johnson, Director
Edina Community Center
e
:A
.�0 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
�'�RPOR�`Sby •
X686
To: KEN ROSLAND, MANAGER
Agenda Item #
VII.A
From. 11ARCELLA DAEHN, CLERK
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Date. JULY 16, 1992
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject: PETITION FOR STORM SEWER
0
To Council
BETWEEN 5701 AND 5.7237RANCE
AVENUE SOUTH
Action
FLI
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Refer the petition for storm sewer between 5701 and 5723 France Avenue South
to the Engineering Department for processing.
Info/Background-
The attached petition for storm sewer, dated July 15, 1992, was received from
property owners on France Avenue and Wood End Drive.
Our normal procedure is to refer the petition to the Engineering Department
for processing as to feasibility.
❑ SIDEWALK
N STORM SEWER
❑ ALLEY PAVING
❑ SANITARY SEWER
❑ WATERMAIN
❑ STREET LIGHTING
❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY ❑ PERMANENT STREET ❑ OTHER:
SURFACING WITH
CURB AND GUTTER
To the Mayor and City Council:
The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider the improvements listed above
to the loc.;t-ons listed below. +�
—58-tic;; Ave, �� between S / O I and �5 123
LOCATION l.+' IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS
between
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME
ADDRESS
and
ADDRESS
between and
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS
between
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME
ADDRESS
and
ADDRESS
IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THIS PETITION UNDERSTAND THAT
THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST THE
PROPERTIES BENEFITING FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED BY THE
COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 429, MINNESOTA STATUTES.
I R, 1 - -i , ,i ` OWNEIVS NAME PROPERTYADDRESS OWNER'S
SIGNA
r (PRINTED) PHONE
cs
This petition was circulated by: p,
DA),J 202V6 A1464.5 JOC6 mves Lw*, 01., 6s� E ADDRESS PHONE
There is space for more signatures on the back or you may attach extra pages.
SEPTEMBER 1990
,1
A.
o e 71
Cn
• f ~�RBPOMSbv •
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To:
KEN ROSLAND, IMAGER
Agenda Item #
VII.B
From:
14ARCELLA DAEHN, CLERK
Consent
0
Information Only
❑
Date:
JULY 17, 1992
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject:
PETITION RELATING TO
To Council
STREET I11PROVEMENT
NO. BA -298 .(BLAKE ROAD)
Action
7
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Refer the petition relating to Street Improvement No. BA -298 (Blake Road) to
the Engineering Department for processing.
Info/Background-
The attached petition relating to Street Improvement No. BA -298 (Blake Road)
was received from property owners on Blake Road.
Our normal procedure is to refer the petition to the Engineering Department
for processing as to feasibility and recommendation.
❑ SIDEWALK ❑ ALLEY PAVING
❑ STORM SEWER ❑ SANITARY SEWER
❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY ❑ PERMANENT STREET
SURFACING WITH
CURB AND GUTTER
❑ WATERMAIN
❑ STREET LIGHTING
OTHER: 77&
To the Mayor and City Council:
The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider the improvements listed above
to the locations listed below.
between
LOCATION OF IMPROVEM T BY STR NAME
/��l /� between
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME
and
ADDRESS ADDRESS
.li12L, g iaZ V�P— and /
ADDRESS �' ADDRESS
between and
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS
between and
OCATION.OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS
ADDRESS
IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THIS PETITION UNDERSTAND THAT
THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST THE
PROPERTIES BENEFITING FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED BY THE
COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 429, MINNESOTA STATUTES.
PROPERTY OWNER'S
SIGNATURE
OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS
(PRINTED)
M%cytELt_ Etc-kp- 53o°I �Ia 421
Fo ber is F-a rri f Syd j 13 Ac R�
OWNER'S
PHONE
93 - ?svr
�zqj -�jo05
9 384 Y3
%2a ,A- A. SgA/VV,81 5315 gLaW-& %?al 936-- 0 (,93
-"50-4"A 5315 "Aey_ -,5,6 93
This petition was circulated by:
,S'O11•Poo
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
There is space for more signatures on the back or you may attach extra pages.
SEPTEMBER 1890
The persons who have signed this petition ask the City of Edina Council to consider
the following request regarding the improvement BA -298 (Blake Road) permanent street
surfacing with concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalks.
We are collectively requesting that the city council reconsider the addition of
parking on the east side from Pine Grove Road to Scrivner Road.. The residents of this
section of the Blake Road believe there is sufficient parking space available on their
properties making additional parking on the east side of the street unnecessary and
impractical due to the fact that this expansion will jeopardize the survival of the trees,
immediately adjacent to the planned expansion; additionally, it undermines the appearance
of their properties.
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the term of Helen McClelland on the Nine -Mile Creek Watershed District
Board will end on September 29, 1992;
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that it
hereby recommends and nominates Helen McClelland to the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners,for re- appointment to the Pine -Mile Creek Watershed District Board
and urges the Commissioners to approve the re- appointment.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS
CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do
hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of July 20, 1992, and is recorded in
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting. .
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this July 21, 1992.
City Clerk
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK
NUMBER THU,
JUL 16,
1992, 9:58 PM
page 1
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
121987
06/05/92
- $94,000.00
CITY OF EDINA
PAYROLL TRANSFER
060592
LIQUOR PROG
CASH
06/05/92
$94,000.00
CITY OF EDINA
PAYROLL TRANSFER
060992
LIQUOR PROG
CASH
< *>
$0 -00"
121988
06/01/92
$5.74
HENNEPIN COUNTY
PRO SERVICES
149077 2
POLICE DEPT G
PROF SERVICES
< ■>
$5.74"
121989
06/09/92
$16,983.67
FIDELITY BANK
FICA
060992
CENT SVC GENER
SOCIAL SECURI
06/09/92
$4,514.19
FIDELITY BANK
MEDICARE
060992
CENT SVC GENER
MEDICARE
< *>
$21,497.86"
121990
06/09/92
$19.62
PERA
PERA
060992
CENT SVC GENER
PENSIONS
< ■>
$19.62"
123101
06/09/92
$28,897.76
PERA
PERA
060992
CENT SVC GENER
PENSIONS
< *>
$28,897.76"
123102
07/11/92
$120.90
EAGLE WINE
L119920618
571557
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.21
EAGLE WINE
LI19920618
571557
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$340.30
EAGLE WINE
LI19920618
571564
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.40
EAGLE WINE
LI19920618
571564
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI07.11
07/11/92
$40.00
EAGLE WINE
LI19920618
572044
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.40
EAGLE WINE
LI19920618
572044
50TH ST.SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$735.45
'.EAGLE WINE
LI19920618
572145
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-47.35
EAGLE WINE
LI19920618
572145
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< ■>
$1,224.29"
123103
07/11/92:
$696.45
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
L119920618
2598
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,225.99
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2645
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $24.52
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2645
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$213.00
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2512
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$499.30.
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2567
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$70.00
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2597
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $1.40
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2597
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$49.00
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
L119920618
2596
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$993.05
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2647
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$355.00
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2484
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$547.35
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2591
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD-WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$49.00
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2589
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LIC711
07/11/92
$759.60
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
L119920618
26x9
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$85.00
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2590
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.70
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2590
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,034.17
ED PHILLIPS&
SONS
LI19920618
2608
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $40.68
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2608
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$305.50
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2960
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$6.11
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
L119920618
2960
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$18.60
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
3022
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$231.45
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2587
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$419.46
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920618
2961
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
Li0711
<->
$8.477.51"
123104
07/11/92
55,837.97
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.'
LI19920618
572158
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07111192
- $116.76
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
L119920618
572158
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07111192
$1,056.79
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920618
572159
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD 1.I0
LI0711
07/11/92
-- $21.14
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920618
572159
VERNON SELLING
CASH D.ISCOUNI
LI0711
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK
NUMBER
THU,
JUL
16,
1992, 9:58 PM
P "19e 2
CHECK#
DATE_
CHECK
I----- - - -
- -- 572060E
-------- ----I-
---- -- ---
- ---- --
123104
-- - --
07/11/92
-AMOUNT
$1,106.66
-----
- - - - -- COOPER
GRIGGS
&
CO
----------
C--
07/11/92
- $22.13
GRIGGS COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920618
572160
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,105.88
GRIGGS COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920618
572161
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $22.12
GRIGGS COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920618
572161
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711.
0)
$8,925.15*
123105
07/11/92
$1,009.26
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325392
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$6.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO,
LI19920618
7325392
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $20.18
JOHNSON
WINE.CO.
LI19920618
7325392
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$130.37
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325418
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$2.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325418
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.31
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325418
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$637.39
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325376
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$6.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325376
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LID711
07/11/92
-$6.38
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325376
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$87.02
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325384
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$0.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325384
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.87
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325384
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$87.51
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325400
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$2.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325400
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.88
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
.7325400
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$65.46
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325426
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$0.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325426
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.31
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325426
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$146.06
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325459
YORK SELLING
CST.OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325459
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.46
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325459 .
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$108.15
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7335292
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$2.16
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7335292
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$40.28
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325335
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.40
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325335
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
- $40.28
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325335
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$0.40
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325335
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$39.78
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325335
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD W.IN
LI0711
07/11/92
$0.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325335
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.40
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325335
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$287.88
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325350
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
57.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
L119920618
7325350
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GO WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$2.89
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325350
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$416.64
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325319
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
GD WIN
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
$5.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920618
LI19920618
7325319
7325319
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
CST OF
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
-$4.16
$6,686.33
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325343
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$34.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325343
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $133.76
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325343
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$4,722.42
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325467
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
LI0711
07/11./92
$27.50
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920618
LI19920618
7325467
7325467
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
CST
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
- $94.44
$627.47
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
7325434
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$7.00
JOHNSON.
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
LI19920618
7325434
7325434
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
-$6.28
$274.70
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920618
7325483
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$6.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920618
LI19920618
7325483
7325483
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
-$2.75
$306.19
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920618
7325475
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK
NUMBER THU, JUL 16,
1992, 9:5.8 PM
page 3
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT .
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT.
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
123105
07/11/92
$8.50
JOHNSON WINE CO.
LI19920618
7325475
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.07
JOHNSON WINE CO.
LI19920618
7325475
YORK SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$457.58
JOHNSON WINE CO.
LI19920618
7325368
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LID711
07/41/92
$9.00
JOHNSON WINE CO.
LI19920618
7325368
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.59
JOHNSON WINE CO.
LI19920618
7325368
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$15,928.32*
123106
07/11/92
$444..39
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920618
571452
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.44
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920618
571452
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$188.69
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920618
571454
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.89
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920618
571454
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$655.32
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920618
571455
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$6.55
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920618
571455
YORK SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$1,275.52*
123107
07/11/92
$99.48
QUALITY WINE.
LI19920618
161285
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.99
QUALITY WINE
L119920618
161285
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,457.44
QUALITY WINE
L119920618
914
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $49.15
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
914
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,669.23
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
919
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $53.38
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
919
YORK SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$579.25
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
923
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $11.59
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
923
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$431.64
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
993
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$8.63
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
993
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$155.15
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
994
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.10
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
994
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,235.96
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
1155
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $12.36.
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
11.55
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$497.83
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
1161
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.98
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
1161
YORK SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$536.62
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
1171
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $5.37.
QUALITY WINE
LI19920618
1171
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI07.11
< *>
$8,512.05*
123108
07/11/92
$342.00
SALUD AMERICA
LI19920618
2773
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$4.25
SALUD AMERICA
LI19920618
2773
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
< *>
$346.25*
123109
06/12/92
$160.00
MACHOLDA,ED
STARTING CASH /POOL
061292
SWIM PROG
CHANGE
FUND
< *)
$160.00*
123110
07/11/92
$682.00
EAGLE WINE
LI19920617
574354
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI07.11
07/11/92
-$6.82
EAGLE WINE
LI19920617
574354
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$404.40
EAGLE WINE
LI19920617
574356
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.04
EAGLE WINE
LI19920617
574356
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$866.55
EAGLE WINE
LI19920617
574358
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $8.67
EAGLE WINE
LI19920617
574358
YORK SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
•$160.00
EAGLE WINE
LI19920617
574534
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- -$1.60
EAGLE WINE
LI19920617
574534
YORK SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$2,091.82*
123111
07/11/92
$632.65
ED PHILLIPS & SONS
LI19920617
5374
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$250.00
ED PHILLIPS & SONS
LI19920617
5373
YORK SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$5.00
ED PHILLIPS & SONS
LI19920617
5373
YORK SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK
NUMBER THU,
JUL 16,
1992, 9:58 PM
page 4
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
-------------=----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
123111
07/11/92
$1,047.11
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4966
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $20.94
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4966
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$798.40
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4711
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$713.30
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
5063
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
L10711
07/11/92
$1,240.05
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4967
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$203.70
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
5580
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.07
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
5580
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,450.74
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4943
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $49.01
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4943
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$653.25
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4704
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,532.50
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4962
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$473.20
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4763
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07111/92
$120.60
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
5008
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
L10711
07/11/92
$417.40
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4938
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$253..95
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS.
LI19920617
5006 .50TH
ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,280.88
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4937
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $25.62
ED PHILLIPS &
SONS
LI19920617
4937
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$11,963.09*
123112
07/11/92
- $21.95
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
63952
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$0.22
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
63952
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$3,946.12
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574637
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $78.92
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574637
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT.
LI0711
07/11/92
$778.86
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574638
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $15.58
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574638
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,043.96
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574639
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $40.88
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574639
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$5,018.02
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574640
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $100.36
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574640
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$240.08
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574641
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $4.80
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920617
574641
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$11,764.77*
123113
07/11/92
$383.63
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352941
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$11.00
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617.
7352941
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.84
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352941
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,194.38
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352933
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$8.00
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352933
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $11.94
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352933
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$243.63
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7325327
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$1.25
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7325327
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/T1/92
-$4.87
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7325327
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$5,317.39
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352958
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$28.08
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352958
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $106.37
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352958
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$64.25
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352966
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$0.50
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352966
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD.WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.64
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7352966
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$531.39
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7337199
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$10.63
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7337199
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
- $48.03
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7313703
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$807.01
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7360076
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$13.50
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
L119920617
7360076
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$8.06
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7360076
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$406.93
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920617
7353030
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK
NUMBER
THU, JUL 16,
1992, 9:58 PM
I
page 5
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=-----------------_--------------
123113
07/11/92
$12.00
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353030
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD_WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.06
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353030
YORK
.SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,020.97
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353022
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$8.50
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353022
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $10.22
JOHNSON
WINE. CO.
LI19920617
7353022
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$39.78
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353055
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$0.50
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353055
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711.
07/11/92
-$0.40
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353055
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$5,378.47
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353048
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$31.50
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353048
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $107.56
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353048
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/1.1/92
$2,153.78
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI199.20617
7353014
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$10.50
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353014
50TH
ST
CST
OF GD LIQ
LID711
07/11/92
- $43.09
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353014
50TH
,SELLIN
ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$366.44
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7352990
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$5.00
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7352990
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.68
JOHNSON
WINE "C0.
LI19920617
7352990
50TH
ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$177.08
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7352982
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN.LI0711
07/11/92
$1.00
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7352982
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.77
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7352982
50TH
ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
-$7.33
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7300221
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$110.81
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI199206.17
7353006
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$3.50
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353006
50TH
ST SELLIN.
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $1..12
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920617
7353006
50TH
ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
517,957.16
*.
123114
07/11/92
$197.90
PAUSTIS
& SONS
LI19920617
24449
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN.LI0711
07/11/92
$5.00
PAUSTIS
& SONS
019920617
24449
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$268.90
PAUSTIS
& SONS
LI19920617
24450
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$6.00
PAUSTIS
& SONS
LI19920617
24450
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$520.50
PAUSTIS
& SONS
LI19920617
24451
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$13.60
PAUSTIS
& SONS
LI19920617
24451
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIPE
LI0711
< *>
$1,011.90*
123115
07/11/92
$99.50
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
573961
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.00
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
573961
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$599.86
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574000
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$6.00
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574000
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$422.75
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574002
.50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.23
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574002
50TH
ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$518.81
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
L119920617
574004
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$5.18
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574004
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
- $518.81
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574004
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$5.18
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574004
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$518.01
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574004
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LIC711
07/11/92
-$5.18
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920617
574004
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$1,623.71*
123116
07/11/92
$902.73
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920617
00151800
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $18.05
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920617
00151800
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,795.43
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920617
2078
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $17.95
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920617
2078
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$358.33
QUALITY
WINE
LI1992061.7
2522
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.58
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920617
2522
YORK
SELLING
CASH.
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,783.81
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920617
2602
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:58 PM
page '6'
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
123116
07/11/92
- $55.68
QUALITY WINE
LI19920617
2602
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$5,745.04*
123117
06/19/92
- $42,000.00
CITY OF EDINA
PAYROLL TRANSFER
061992
LIQUOR PROG
CASH
06/19/92
$42,000.00
CITY OF EDINA
PAYROLL TRANSFER
061992
LIQUOR PROG
CASH
< *>
$0.00*
123118
07/11/92
$459.00
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
575128
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.59
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
575128
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$86.00
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
575250
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.86
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
575250
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$19.98
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576717
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.20
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576717
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$888.34
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576746
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GO WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$8.88
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576746
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$332.59
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576748
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.33
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576748
50TH
ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$575.15
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576751
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$5.75
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576751
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$162.80
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576908
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GO WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.63
EAGLE WINE
LI19920630
576908
50TH
ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
<+�>
$2,498.62*
123119
07/11/92
$497.50
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
71 4
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$158.15
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7198
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$330.20
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7093
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LID711
07/11/92
$56.30
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7199
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.13
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7199
50TH
ST SELLIN
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
-$18.60
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
136872
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$695.05
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7200
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$343.00
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
6888
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,448.65
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7206
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GO LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $28.97
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7206
YORK
SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,225.35
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7207
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$621.05
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7113
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711,
07/11/92
$269.91
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7114
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$5.40
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7114.
YORK
SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$168.60
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7802
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.37
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7802
YORK
SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$692.64
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
6905
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,420.26
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7212
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $28.41
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7212
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$855.35
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
7213
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$372.10
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
6201
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$7.50
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
136738
VERNON SELLING
TRADE DISCOUN
LI0711
07/11/92
$147.80
ED PHILLIPS
&
SONS
LI19920630
8254
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GD WIN
LI0711 -
< *>
$9,208.53*
123120
07/11/92
$3,982.93
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920630
577001
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LID711
07/11/92
- $79.66
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920630
577001
VERNON SELLING
CASH
DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,001.12
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920630
577002
50TH
ST SELLIN
CST
OF GO LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $20.02
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920630
577002
50TH
ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$3,700.11
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920630
577003
YORK
SELLING
CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $74.00
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920630
577003
YORK
SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07111192
- $24.00
GRIGGS COOPER
& CO.
LI19920630
64362
YORK
SELLING
TRADE DISCOUN
LI0711
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER
CHECK #. DATE CHECK AMOUNT
<k>
$8,486.48"
THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:58 PM
VENDOR DESCRIPTION
INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. '#
123121 07/11/92
$209.29
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7399175
07/11/92
$4.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7399175
07/11/92
-$2.10
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7399175
07/11/92
$2,448.68
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379159
07/11/92
$12.08
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7319159
07/11/92
- $48.97
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379159
07/11/92
$108.08
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379167
07/11/92
$0.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701 -
7379167
07/11/92
-$1.08
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379167
07/11/92
$177.69
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379142
07/11/92
$2.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379142
07/11/92
-51.78
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379142
07/11/92
$213.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920.701
7360068
07/11/92
$4.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
.7360068
07/11/92
-$2.14
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7360068
07/11/92
- $13.58
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7148430
07/11/92
$1,049.28
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379217
07/11/92
$27.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379217
07/11/92
- $10.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379217
07/11/92
$5,069.99
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379191
07/11/92
$32.21
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379191
07/11/92
- $101.41
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379191
07/11/92
$1,362.69
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379183
07/11/92
$14.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379183
07/11/92
- $13.63
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379183
07/11/92
$354.53
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379209
07/11/92
$3.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379209
07/11/92
-$3.54
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379209
07/11/92
$895.65
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379225
07/11/92
$18.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379225
07/11/92
-$8.97
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7379225
07/11/92
$451.77
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7360043
07/11/92
$9.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7360043
07/11/92
-34.52
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7360043
07/11/92
- $97.78
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7329766
07/11/92
- $6.16
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7336399
07/11/92
$435.61
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920701
7388440
07/11/92
-$8.72
JOHNSON.WINE
CO.
L119920701
7388440
<*>
$12,579.17"
123122 07/11/92
$148.25
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY,
LI19920706
576360
07/11/92
-$1.49
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576360
07/11/92.
- 3148.25
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576360
07/11/92
$1.49
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576360
07/11/92
$149.25
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576360
07/11/92
-$1.49
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576360
07/11/92
$983.91
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
- .LI19920706
576398
07/11/92
-$9.84
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576398
07/11/92
$142.31
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI199207.06
576399
07/11/92
-$1.42
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576399
07/11/92
$1,176.92
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576400
07/11/92
- $11.77
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576400
07111192
$79.80
PRIOR WINE
COMPANY
LI19920706
576850
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST.SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50THcST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
YORK SELLING -
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING'
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING.
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GO WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD LIQ
CST OF GD LIQ
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GO WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD LIQ
CST OF GD LIQ
CASH OF CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GO WIN
CST OF GD WIN
CST OF GD LIQ
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GO WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
L'I0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
LI0711
L10711
LI0711
LI0711
page 7
COUNCIL CHECK REGI:;ILR BY CHECK NUMBER THU, JUL 16, 1992. 9:58 PM
page 8
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
123122
07/11/92
-$0.80
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
576850
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$202.10
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
578109
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0.711
07/11/92
-$2.02
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
578109
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< ■.>
$2,706.95"
123123
07/11/92
$46.95
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3784
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.47
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3784
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$432.41
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3523
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.32
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3523
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
51,349.63
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4185
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $26.99
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4185
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$714.42
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2075
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$7.14
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2076
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$974.45
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2608
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $19.49
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2608
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,031.20
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3489
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $10.31
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3489
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT.LI0711
.07/11/92
$3,089.32
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4187
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- 861.79
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4187
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,509.38
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2561
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $50.19.
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2561
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,212.07
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3518
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92.
- $12.12
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3518
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$93.90
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
41$9-
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.94
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4189
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$3,774.64
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4188
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $75.49
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4188
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$60.45
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3716
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.60
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
3716
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$46.50
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2165
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.47
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2165
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,970.06
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2071
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711(
07/11/92
- $19.70
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2071
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$293.90
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2564
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$2.94
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2564
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$64.58
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4685
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.29
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4685
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$751.99
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4647
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $15.04
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
4647
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$18,106.56"
123124
07/11/92
$150.00
WINE MERCHANTS
LI19920706.
2828
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92.
$2.00
WINE MERCHANTS
LI19920706
2828
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
< *>
$152.00*
123125
07/11/92
$126.00
WORLD CLASS
WINE
LI19920706
10421
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$2.55
.
WORLD CLASS
WINE
LI19920706
10421
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$205.00
WORLD CLASS
WINE
LI19920706
10422
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$2.00
WORLD CLASS
WINE
LI19920706
10422
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
< *>
$335.55*
123127
06/23/92
$430.10
COMM LIFE
INS CO.
JULY INSURANCE
062392
CENT SVC GENER
LIFE INSURANC
< *>
$430.10*
123128
06/23/92
$19.62
PERA
PERA
062392
CENT SVC GENER
PENSIONS
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK.NUMBER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:58 PM
page 9
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
- OBJECT
P.O. #
--------------------------
< *>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$19.62*
123129
06/23/92
$28,810.87
PERA
PERA
062392
CENT SVC GENER
PENSIONS
< *>
$28;810.87*
123130
06/23/92
$17,353.34
FIDELITY BANK
FICA
062392
CENT SVC GENER
SOCIAL SECURI
06/23/92
$4,633.14
FIDELITY BANK
062392
CENT SVC GENER
MEDICARE
< *>
$21,986.48*
123131
07/11/92
$129:78
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379126
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1.00
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379126
VERNON SELLING
CST-OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.30
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379126
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$689.57
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379134
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GO
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$16.00
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379134
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$6.89
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379134
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$5,304.93
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379118
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD
LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$32.00
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379118
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD
LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $106.09
JOHNSON WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7379118
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$6,059.00*
123132
07/11/92
$438.75
BELLBOY CORPORATION
LI19920708
32255
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD
LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$438.75
BELLBOY CORPORATION
LI19920706
32254
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD
LIQ
LI0711
< *>
$877.50*
123133
07111/92
$164.00
EAGLE WINE
LI19920706
577633
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.64
EAGLE WINE
LI19920706
577633
YORK SELLING
CASH. DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$441.14.
EAGLE WINE
LI19920706
578686
VERNON'SELLING
CST OF GO
WIN
LID711
0.7/11/92
-$4.41
EAGLE WINE
LI19920706
578686
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$347.30
EAGLE WINE
LI19920706
578687
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-53.47
EAGLE WINE
LI19920706
578687
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$282.80
EAGLE WINE
LI19920706
579156
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$2.83
EAGLE WINE.
LI19920706
579156
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$1,222.89*
123134
07/11/92
$1,342.29
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9214
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD
LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $26.85
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9214
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$548.00
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
8838
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1 222.40
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9248
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GO
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
1464.15
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9038
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$807.80
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9176
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$425.95
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9027
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$276.80
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
L119920706
8837
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/.11/92
$1,217.61
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9175
YORK SELLING
CST OF GO
LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $24.35
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9175
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$160.00
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
1I19920706
9026
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD
LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
.-$3.20
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
L119920706
9026
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$580.46
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9169
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD
LIQ
LI0711 -
07/11/92
- $11.61
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9169
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92.
$205.74
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9024
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF- GD
LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.11
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9024
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$182.25
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
8911
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
1 $48.95
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
8912
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD
WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$590.95
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9023
50TH ST.SELLIN
CST OF GD
WIN
LID711
07/11/92
$529.20
ED PHILLIPS
& SONS
LI19920706
9170
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD
WIN.LI0711
<*>
$8,532.43*
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK
NUMBER
THU,
JUL 16,
1992, 9:58 PM
page 10
CHECK# DATE
----------------------------------------------------------------
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION - - -
-_- INVOICE -
-_- PROGRAM - -
----- - - - - --
- -- OBJECT - _- -
-P_O. #
--- - - - - --
123136 07/11/92
$139.96
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
-
LI19920706
7405210
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$2.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405210
VERNON SELLING
CST.OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.40
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405210
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
5697.49
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
L119920706
7405228
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$6.71
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405228
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07./11/92
-$7.89
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405228
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$315.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405251
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405251
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.15
JOHNSON -WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405251
VERNON SELLING
CASH.DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$368.27'
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405269
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$10.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405269
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.67
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405269
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
L.I0711
07/11/92
$475.01
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405277
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$9.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405277
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711.
07/11/92
-$4.76
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405277
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$5,764.32
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405244
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$30.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405244
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $115.31
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920706
LI19920706
7405244
7405236
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
$618.00
$1.50
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405236
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
L10711
07/11/92
- $12.36
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405236
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
-$2.36
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
1443746
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $26.40
- JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
1443795
VERNON SELLING
TRADE DISCOUN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $11.11
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7383516
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$67.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
L.I19920706
7413149
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.32
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7413149
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
- $67.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7413149
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$1.32
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7413149
VERNON.SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$66.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7413149
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$1.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7413149
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI07.1.1
07/11/92
- $1..32
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7413149
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$799.85
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405384
YORK SELLING
CST. OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$15.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405384
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$8.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO..
LI19920706
7405384
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$495.34
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405350
YORK SELLING
CST OF -GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$6.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405350
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.97
JOHNSON
WINE
CO..
LI19920706
7405350
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$284.72
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405376
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$8.00
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920706
L119920706
7405376
7405376
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
-$2.85
$121.85
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405343
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405343
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LID711.
07/11/92
-$1.22
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405343
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,919.55
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405368
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
CST-OF GD LIQ
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
$16.00
$58.39
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920706
LI19920706
7405368
7405368
YORK SELLING
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
-
$1_,278.92
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
7405319
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
$9.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
L119920706
LI19920706
7405319
7405319
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
- $25.58
$164.78
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920706
7405293
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$1.00
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
LI19920706
LI19920706
7405293
7405293.
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF. GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
07/11/92
-$1.65
$285.56
JOHNSON
JOHNSON
WINE
WINE
CO.
CO.
LI19920706
7405301
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$2.50
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
L119920706
LI19920706
7405301
7405301
50TH ST SELLIN
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
LI0711
07/11/92
-$2.86
JOHNSON
WINE
CO.
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK
NUMBER
THU. JUL 16,
1992, 9:58 PM
page 11
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=---------------------------
123136
07/11/92
$150.06
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920706
7405327
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$5.00
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920706
7405327
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$1.47
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920706
7405327
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$315.72
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920706
7405335
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$6.00
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920706
7405335
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$3.16
JOHNSON
WINE CO.
LI19920706
7405335
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$15,094.23*
123137
07/11/92
$95.50
MN CROWN DIST
LI19920706
.2080
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$120.00
MN CROWN DIST
LI19920706
2098
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
< *>
$215.50*
123138
07/11/92
$156.95
PAUSTIS
& SONS
WINE
24760
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
07/11/92
$154.55
PAUSTIS
& SONS
LI19920706
24744
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
$4.00
PAUSTIS
& SONS
LI19920706
24744
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
< *>
$315.50*
123139
07/11/92
$496.58
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
578619
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GO WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$4.97
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
578619
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$561.17
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
578621
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$5.61
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
578621
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$800.01
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
578663
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$8.00
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
LI19920706
578663
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$1,839.18 *'
123140
07/11/92
$1,478.35
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5636
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
- $15.13
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5636
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$676.82
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5646
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$6.77
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5646
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$1,396.65
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5649
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $27.93
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5649
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH.DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$518.44
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5650
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$5.18
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5650
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,369.05
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5651
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $47.38
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5651
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,485.21
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5652
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
.- $49.70
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5652
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$93.90
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5654
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.94
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5654
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711 -
07/11/92
$46.95
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5726
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.47
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5726
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$60.00
QUALITY
WINE
L119920706
5858
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
07/11/92
-$0.60
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
5858
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,643.33
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
161038
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $52.88
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
161038
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
- $51.50
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2071
VERNON SELLING
CST OF.GD WIN.
LI0711
07/11/92
$0.51
QUALITY
WINE
LI19920706
2071
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$11,510.73*
123141
07/11/92
$64.00
SALUD AMERICA
LI19920708
2818
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LID711
07/11/92
$2.00
SALUD AMERICA
LI19920706
28.18
VERNON-SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
< *>
$66.00*
123142
07/11/92
$66.00
WORLD CLASS.WINE
LI19920706
13449
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WIN
LI0711
< *>
$66.00*
121.974.6/1/92
$89.65
Dan Dornseif
Mileage
51592
Golf Course
Mileage or Allow
$89.65
r
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK
NUMBER
THU,
JUL
16,
1992, 9:58 PM
page 12
CHECK# DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
---------------------------=--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
123143 07/11/92
$3,795.10
GRIGGS
COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920706
579275
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $75.90
GRIGGS
COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920706
579275
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$2,509.27
GRIGGS
COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920706
579276
50TH ST SELLIN'CST
OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- $50.19
GRIGGS
COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920706,
579276
50TH ST SELLIN
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
35,132.04
GRIGGS
COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920706
579277
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
- 3102.'64
GRIGGS
COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920706
579277
YORK SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
07/11/92
$398.78
GRIGGS
COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920706
584552
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
LI0711
07/11/92
-$7.98
GRIGGS
COOPER
&
CO.
LI19920706
584552
VERNON SELLING
CASH DISCOUNT
LI0711
< *>
$11,598.48*
e 1 1 n -f A C 9 3A
-
$310,235.58*
COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY BY CHECK NUMBER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:58 PM
page I
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FUND # 10 $101,668.05
FUND # 26 $160.00
FUND # 50 $208,317.88
$910 .. _
Fund # 27 $89.65
Total $310,235.58*
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34-PM
page 1
CHECK#
------------------------------------------------------------=-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
128536
07/20/92
$320.61
3M CO
LETTERING
TP62295
STREET NAME SI
SIGNS &
POSTS
2410
< *>
$320.61*
128537
07/20/92
$103.87
A.M. LEONARD
TOOLS
234641
BUILDING & GRO
TOOLS
2736
07/20/92
$103.86
A.M. LEONARD
TOOLS
234641
CENTENNIAL LAK
TOOLS
< *>
5207.73*
128539
07/20/92
$667.81
AAGARD.
GARBAGE
181 /JULY
GENERAL MAINT
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$107.54
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1698 /JUL
FIRE DEPT. GEN
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$134.42
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1696 /JUL
CITY HALL GENE
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$667.81
AAGARD
GARBAGE
181 /JULY
PW BUILDING
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$107.54
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1701 /JUL
LITTER REMOVAL
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$430.15
AAGARD .
GARBAGE
1172 /JUL
LITTER REMOVAL
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$107..54
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1161 /JUL
LITTER REMOVAL
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$53.77
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1695 /JUL
ART CENTER BLD
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$161.30
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1253 /JUL
POOL OPERATION
RUBBISH
REMOV.
07/20/92
$645.23
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1702 /JUL
CLUB HOUSE
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$144.29
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1700 /JUL
MAINT OF COURS
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$322.62
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1689 /JUL
ARENA BLDG /GRO
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$425.87
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1694 /JUL
BUILDING & ORO
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$36.75
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1424 /JUL
50TH ST OCCUPA
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$63.63
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1425 /JUL
YORK OCCUPANCY
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$159.22
AAGARD
GARBAGE
1423 /JUL
VERNON OCCUPAN
RUBBISH
REMOV
07/20/92
$26.88
AAGARD
GARBAGE
2299/JUL
GUN RANGE
RUBBISH
REMOV
< *>
$4,262.37*
128540
07/20/92
$130.90
ABP MIDWEST
MEETING
EXP
536299
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
EXPEN
2836
< *>
$130.90*
128541
07/20/92
$315.00
ACME WINDOW CLEAN
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
004429
STREET REVOLVI
GENERAL
SUPPL
2725
< *>
$315.00*
128542
07/20/92
$35.65
ACTION MESSENGER
SERVICE
CONTRACT
88045
ADMINISTRATION
SVC CONTR EQU
< *>
$35.65*
128543
07/20/92
$516.53
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
008008
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL
SUPPL
2081.
07/20/92
$21.26
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
REPAIR
PARTS
008044
CITY HALL GENE
REPAIR
PARTS
2416
07/20/92
$68.70
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
16831
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL
SUPPL
2624
07/20/92
$55.56
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
REPAIR
PARTS
16832
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR
PARTS
2679
07/20/92
$34.26
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
16930
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL
SUPPL
2679
07/20/92.
$44.80
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
REPAIR
PARTS
17761
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR
PARTS
2679
07/20/92
$243.55
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
008088
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL
SUPPL
2677
< ">
$984.66*
128544
07/20/92
$45.00
AMEM
CONT ED
071392
CIVIL DEFENSE
CONF &
SCHOOL
< *>
$45.00*
128545
07/20/92
$115.00
AMERICAN LASER CUT G
REPAIR
PARTS
66487
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
2543
< *>
$115.00"
128546
07/20/92
$407.19
AMERICAN LINEN
LAUNDRY
063092
POOL TRACK GRE
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$66.86
AMERICAN LINEN
LAUNDRY
063092
VERNON OCCUPAN
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$53.67
AMERICAN LINEN
LAUNDRY
063092
YORK OCCUPANCY
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$63.55
AMERICAN LINEN
LAUNDRY
063092
50TH ST OCCUPA
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$312.36
AMERICAN.LINEN
LAUNDRY
063092
CITY HALL GENE
LAUNDRY
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL
16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 2
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.--------
128546
07/20/92
$11.70
AMERICAN LINEN
LAUNDRY
063092
LABORATORY
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$188.68
AMERICAN LINEN
LAUNDRY
063092
FIRE DEPT. GEN
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$44.36
AMERICAN LINEN
LAUNDRY
063092/G
GRILL
LAUNDRY
< *>
$1,148.37*
128547
07/20/92
$66.50
ANDERSON, DERICK
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE
071492
ENGINEERING GE
MILEAGE
< *>
$66.50*
128548
07/20/92
$15.00
APPLE AUTOMATIC FOOD
REFUND /VENDING LICENS
070692
GENERAL FD PRO
FOOD VENDING
< *>
$15.00*
128549
07/20/92
$41.29
AQUA ENGINEERING
GENERAL SUPPLIES
34034
SNOW.& ICE REM
GENERAL SUPPL
2408
< *>
$41.29*
128550
07/20/92
$85.17
ARMSTRONG MEDICAL
FIRST AID SUPPLIES
0211024
FIRE DEPT. GEN
FIRST AID SUP
1659
< *>
$85.17*
128551
07/20/92
$51.00
ASIAN PAGES
WANT ADS
70192 -12
CENT SVC GENER
ADVERT PERSON
< *>
$51.00*
128552
07/20/92
$28.50
ASPLUND COFFEE
COST OF GOODS SOLD
42580
CENTENNIAL LAK
CST OF GD F00
< *>
$28.50*
128553
07/20/92
$785.00 SAT
& T INFO SYSTEM
TELEPHONE
51891073
SENIOR CITIZEN
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$79.00
AT & T INFO SYSTEM
TELEPHONE
51891166
CENT SVC GENER
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$28.89
AT & T INFO SYSTEM
TELEPHONE
51891141
ART CENTER BLD
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$30.71
AT & T INFO SYSTEM
TELEPHONE
51893480
CENT SVC GENER
TELEPHONE
< *>
$923.60*
128554
07/20/92
$13.35
AT &T CONS PROD DIV
TELEPHONE
062692/9
CENT SVC GENER
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$17.85
AT &T CONS PROD DIV
TELEPHONE
070292 .
CENT SVC GENER
TELEPHONE
< *>
$31.20*
128555
07/20/92
$168.90
AUTOMOTIVE WHOLESALE
REPAIR PARTS
41697
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2499
< *>
$168.90*
128556
07/20/92
$20.14
AXT -LYLE
COST OF GOODS SOLD FO
071492
GUN RANGE
CST OF GD F00
0 >
$20.14*
128557
07/20/92
$630.80
BACHMANS NURSERY WHO
PLANTS
41874
CENTENNIAL LAK
TREES.FLWR SH
2130
07/20/92
$37.95
BACHMANS NURSERY WHO
GENERAL SUPPLIES
44698
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
2062
< *>
$668.75*
128558
07/20/92
$687.86
BARR ENG
CONSTR. IN PROGRESS
12234 -18
GC CIP
CIP
< *>
$687.86*
128559.07/20/92
$1288.880
BARREL RECONDITIONER
GENERAL SUPPLIES
R16720
LITTER REMOVAL
GENERAL SUPPL
2782
*
0 *
128560
07/20/92
$151.50
BARRETT SPORTSWEAR
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1628
ATHLETIC ACTIV
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$151.50*
128561
07%20/92
$450.00
BARRY SIEWERT CREATI
PROMOTION
0692
CENTENNIAL LAK
PROF SERVICES
2805
< *>
$450.00*
0
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL
16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 3
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. 8
---------------=--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128562
07/20/92
$78.34
BATTERY WAREHOUSE
REPAIR PARTS
189947
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2433
< *>
$78.34*
128563
07/20/92
$173.33
BEAR COMMUNICATIONS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
016287
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPL
1655
< *>
$173.33*
128564
07/20/92
$30.50
BEER WHOLESALERS
MIX
JUNE /109
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$891.90
BEER WHOLESALERS
MIX
JUNE /109
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$931.00
BEER WHOLESALERS
BEER
JUNE /109
YORK. SELLING
CST OF-GDS BE
07/20/92
$69.30
BEER WHOLESALERS
MIX
JUNE /109
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$76.50
BEER WHOLESALERS
MIX
JUNE /109
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$1,844.20
BEER WHOLESALERS
BEER
JUNE /109
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$1,715.94
BEER WHOLESALERS
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
063092
GRILL
CST OF GDS BE
9028
< *>
$5,559.34*
128565
07/20/92
$100.00
BENNETT -WAYNE
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
- -$100.00*
128566
07/20/92
$44.85
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
754978
FIRE DEPT.. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
07/20/92
$46.50
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
754980
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
07/20/92
$56.50
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
756736
FIRE DEPT'. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
9552
07/20/92
$41.50
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
756734
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
07/20/92
$46.50
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
756738
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
07/20/92
$44.85
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
763818
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
07/20/92
$41.50
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
763816
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
07/20/92
$38.50
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
764379
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
07/20/92
$36.50
BENSON OPTICAL
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
769941
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROTECT CLOTH
< *>
$3.97.20*
128567
07/20/92
$137.00
BERGFORD TRUCKING
LIQUOR DELIVERY
070292
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GO LIQ
07/20/92
$256.00
BERGFORD TRUCKING
LIQUOR DELIVERY
070192
YORK SELLING
CST OF GO LIQ
07/20/92
$274.00
BERGFORD TRUCKING
LIQUOR DELIVERY
063092
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQ
< *>
$667.00*
128568
07/20/92
$25.68
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
779692
PARK ADMIN.
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$149.34
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
779692
CENT SVC GENER
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$31.81
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
795678
FINANCE
GENERAL.SUPPL
07/20/92
$12.98
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
795678
PARK ADMIN.
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$207.35
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
795678
CENT SVC GENER
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$32.29
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
795478
POLICE DEPT. G
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$97.58
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
OFFICE SUPPLIES
795791
ARENA ADMINIST
OFFICE SUPPLI
2762
07/20/92
$3.37
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
79547861
POLICE DEPT. G
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
- $67.31
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
CREDIT
CM791319
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$293.73
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
792373
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL SUPPL
2515
07/20/92
$46.83
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
OFFICE SUPPLIES
795952
FIRE DEPT. GEN
OFFICE SUPPLI
1667
07/20/92
$9.07
BERTELSON BROS. INC,
GENERAL SUPPLIES
796939
POLICE DEPT. G
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$99.07
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
797340
PARK ADMIN.
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$941.79*
128569
07/20/92
$17.42
BEST LOCK OF MPLS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
027958 -A
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2572
< *>
$17.42*
12857007/20/92
$5,946.38
BFI OF MN INC
REFUSE
062592
50TH STREET RU
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$5,946.38*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU. JUL
16, 1992,. 9:34 PM
page 4
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE.
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. .#
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128571
07/20/92
$34,233.55
BFI RECYCLING SYS
EQUIPMENT RENTAL
920600 -7
RECYCLING
EQUIP RENTAL
< *>
$34,233.55*
128572
07/20/92
$141.10
SFU SERVICE GROUP
RENTAL
920600 -2
MAINT OF COURS
RUBBISH REMOV
< *>
$141.10 *.
128573
07/20/92
$30.00
BJERKEN, LISA
REFUND SWIMMING LESSO
071392
GENERAL FD PRO
REGISTRATION
< *>
$30.00*
128574
07/20/92
$229.73
BJORKS COUNTRY STONE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062392
SIDEWALKS & PA
GENERAL SUPPL
2722
< *>
$229..73*
128575
07/20/92
$495.00
BLACK AMERICAN CAREE
ADERTISING
250012
CENT SVC GENER
ADVERT PERSON
< *>
$495.00*
128576
07/20/92
$168.40
BLEVENS CONS SUPPLY
PIZZA
4208186-
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD F00
07/20/92
$42,.60
BLEVENS CONS SUPPLY
PIZZA OVEN RENT
4208336
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD F00
07/20/92
$126.30
BLEVENS CONS SUPPLY
COST OF GOODS SOLD FO
4208587-
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD FOO
< *>
$337.30*
128577
07/20/92
$100.00
BLOOD DAVID
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
128578
07/20/92
$454.58
BLUE BELL ICE CREAM
ICE CREAM
42J8,477
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD F00
< *>
$454.58*
128579
07/20/92
$2,900.10
BOUSTEAD ELECTRIC &
REPAIRS
333615
PUMP & LIFT.ST
CONTR REPAIRS
2492
< *>
$2,900.10*
128580
07/20/92
$21.75
BOWLER, THOMAS
REIMBURSEMENT /BLDG PE
5708 DAL
GENERAL FD PRO
BUILDING PERM
< *>
$21.75*
128581
07120/92
$27.80
BOYER TRUCKS
REPAIR PARTS
142074
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2483
07/20/92
$96.98
BOYER TRUCKS
REPAIR PARTS
144756
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2724
< *>
$124.78*
128582
07/20/92
$66.20
BRADLEY SENN
CRAFT SUPPLIES
071392
ART CENTER ADM
CRAFT SUPPLIE
< *>
$66.20"
128583
07/20/92
$73.29
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
SAND GRAVEL & ROCK
71392
MAINT OF COORS
SAND,GRVL & R
07/20/92
$103.39
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
71392
ADMINISTRATION
CONF & SCHOOL
07/20/92
$8:00
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
COMPUTERIZED HANDICAP
71392
GOLF PROG
COMPUTR HANDI
07/20/92
$35.94
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
71392
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$60.30
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
71392
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$27.44
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
REPAIR PARTS
71392
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR. PARTS
07/20/92
$66.21
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
PLANTINGS & TREES
71392
MAINT OF COURS
PLANT & TREES
07/20/92
$85.72
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
COST OF GOODS SOLD FO
71392
GRILL
CST OF GD F00
< *>
$460.29*
128584
07/20/92
$99.57
BRENT'S SIGNS DISPLA
GENERAL SUPPLIES
9372
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPL
2909
< *>
$99.57*
128585
07/20/92
$82.84
BRISSMAN- KENNEDY INC
PAPER SUPPLIES
245172
CITY HALL GENE
PAPER SUPPLIE
2650
07/20/92
$195.00
BRISSMAN- KENNEDY INC
TOWELS
245172 -1
CITY HALL GENE
PAPER SUPPLIE
2650
07/20/92
$195.00
BRISSMAN- KENNEDY INC
PAPER SUPPLIES
245172 -2
CITY HALL GENE
PAPER SUPPLIE
2650
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 5
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR.
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
< *>
$472.84*
128586
07/20/92
$330.05
BROCK WHITE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
55660701
GENERAL STORM
GENERAL SUPPL
2626
< *>
$330.05*
128587
07/20/92
$3,661.47
BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUC
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
8707
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
EQUIP MAINT
2327
07/20/92
$239.63
BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUC
REPAIR PARTS
8712
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
REPAIR PARTS
.1253
< *>
53,901.10*
128588
07/20/92
$100.00
BUTLER GEORGE
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
128589
07/20/92
$293.78
C & S DISTRIBUTING
COST OF GOODS SOLD
138612
ART SUPPLY GIF
CST OF GO F00
2456
< *>
$293.78*
128590
07/20/92
$173.60
CALLAHANJRAN
MILEAGE-
070192
PUBLIC HEALTH
MILEAGE
< *>
$173.60*
128591
07/20/92
$210.00
CARMICHAEL, TARA
AC INSTRUCTOR
071392
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$210.00*
128592
07/20/92
$158.78
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
395255
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2489
< *>
$158.78*
„
128593
07/20/92
$33.00
CELLULAR ONE SALES &
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
11781
POLICE DEPT. G
EQUIP MAINT.
<*>
$33.00*
128594.07/20/92
$118.93
CELLULAR ONE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062292/P
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$118.93*
128595
07/20/92
$109.63
CERTIFIED HYDRAULIC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
105535
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL SUPPL
2607
< *>.
$109.63*
128596
07/20/92
$447.30
CHEM CONCEPTS
EX LAWN MIX
0529
CENTENNIAL LAK
FERTILIZER
2900
07/20/92
$334.92
CHEM CONCEPTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
0538
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPL
2710
< *>
$782.22*
128597
07/20/92
$702.31
CHRITTON HANDYMAN SE
REPAIR PARTS
003039
PW BUILDING
REPAIR PARTS
2107
< *>
$702.31*
128598
07/20/92
$325.00
CITY BEER
BEER
JUNE /118
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$68.00
CITY BEER
BEER
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
< *>
$393.00*
128599
07/20/92
$25.00
CITY.OF BLOOMINGTON
GENERAL SUPPLIES
115186
COMMUNICATIONS
GENERAL SUPPL
.
128600
07/20/92
$40.84
CITY OF RICHFIELD
PRO ENG SERV
063092
GENERAL STORM
LIGHT & POWER
< *>
$40.84*
128601
07/20/92
$13.50
CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV
REPAIRS
33148
VERNON OCCUPAN
CONTR REPAIRS
07/20/92
$13.50
CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV
WINDOW CLEANING
33146
50TH ST OCCUPA
CONTR REPAIRS
07/20/92
$13.50
CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV
WINDOW CLEANING
33147
YORK OCCUPANCY
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$40.50*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU. JUL
16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 6
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
- - - - -.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=-----------------------------
128602
07/20/92
$412.98
COCA COLA BOTTLING
MIX
JUNE /119
50TH ST SELLIN
CST.OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$677.39
COCA COLA BOTTLING
MIX
JUNE /119
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
41,574.77
COCA COLA BOTTLING
MIX
JUNE /119
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$2,665.14*
128603
07/20/92
$176.50
COMMUNICATION CENTER
REPAIRS
30395
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
2333
< *>
$176.50*
128604
07/20/92
$236.25
CONNEY SAFETY PRODUC
MISC SUPPLIES
418646 -0
GENERAL MAINT
SAFETY EQUIPM
2.498
< *>
$236.25*
128605
07/20/92
$380.00
COURTNEY, C WAYNE
SERVICES JULY
070792
ADMINISTRATION
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$380.00*
128606
07/20/92
$78.00
COYLE, MICHAEL
AC INSTRUCTOR
071392
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$78.00*
128607
07/20/92
$145.90
CRESCENT ELECTRIC
REPAIR PARTS
069 -0687
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2322
< *>
5145:90*
128608
07/20/92
$1,386.67
CRIMMINS TIMOTHY J M
SERVICES /MEDICAL
JULY
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$1,386.67*
128609
07/20/92
$521.70
CSI
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
17J50
FIRE DEPT.'GEN
CONTR REPAIRS
8893
07/20/92
$29.50
CSI
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
17550
FIRE DEPT. GEN
CONTR REPAIRS
8893
07/20/92
$29.40
CSI
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
17549
FIRE DEPT. GEN
CONTR REPAIRS
8893
< *>
$580.60*
128610
07/20/92
$25.00
CURRY,'GINNA
CLASS REFUND
070892
ART CENTER ADM
REGISTRATION
< *>
$25.00 *.
128611
07/20/92
$130.00
CURT KRIENS CONSTRUC
REPAIRS
070192
MAINT OF COURS
CONTR REPAIRS
2898
< *>
5130.00*
128612
07/20/92
$1,116.07
CURTIS 1000
GENERAL SUPPLIES
9117601-
CENT SVC GENER
GENERAL SUPPL
2510
07/20/92
$557.64
CURTIS 1000
GENERAL SUPPLIES
9247401
CENT SVC GENER
GENERAL SUPPL
2510
< *>
$1,673.71*
128613
07/20/92
$1,375.93
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
REPAIR PARTS
54315
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2401
07/20/92
$17.57
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
REPAIR PARTS
54422
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2496
07/20/92
$164.19
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
REPAIR PARTS
54586
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2599
07/20/92
$33.91
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
REPAIR PARTS
54643
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2574
< *>
$.1,591.60*
128614
07/20/92
$217.26
DALE GREEN CO.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
2020
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2289
< *>
$217.26*
128615
07/20/92
$55..66
DALEN, LINDA
MILEAGE
071492
FINANCE
MILEAGE
< *>
$55.66*
128616
07/20/92
$364.20
DAVE S FOOD WAGON
COST OF GOODS SOLD
FO 070192
GRILL
CST OF GD FOO
9030
< *>
$364.20*
128617
07/20/92
$118.00
DAVIDSEN DIST. INC.
BEER
JUNE /125
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$66.40
DAVIDSEN DIST. INC.
MIX
JUNE /125
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL
16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 7
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
< *>
$184.40*
128618
07/20/92
$820.48
DAVIES WATER EQUIP
REPAIR PARTS
27272
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2264
07/20/92
$121.03
DAVIES WATER.EQUIP
REPAIR PARTS
27893
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2685
< *>
$941.51*
128619
07/20/92
$838.80
DCA INC
FEE FOR SERVICE
0050090
CENT SVC GENER
HOSPITALIZATI
< *>
$838.80*
128620
07/20/92
$96.75
DETERMAN WELDING
BLUE PRINTING
205789
FIRE DEPT. GEN
BLUE PRINTING
2723
< *>
$96.75*
128621
07/20/92
S1,.231.00
DICKER, TOBIE
AC ,INSTRUCTOR
071392
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
07/20/92
$90.00
DICKER, TOBIE
PT MAINT AC
071392
ART ,CENTER BLD
SALARIES TEMP
07/20/92
$14.00
DICKER, TOBIE
-ART WORK SOLD
071392
ART CNTR PROG.
RETAIL SALES
< *>
$1,335.00*
128622
07/20/92
$58.04
DIESEL SERVICE CO
REPAIR PARTS
DS1 -1909
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2428
< *>
$58.04*
128623
07/20/92
$262.00
DIETRICHSON, BILL
AC INSTRUCTOR
071392
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$262.00*
128624
07/20/92
$219.60
DISPATCH COMM /MN
CABLE /CONN
98395
EQUIPMENT OPER
RADIO SERVICE
07/20/92
$576.14
DISPATCH COMM /MN
MAINT CONTRACT
20667
EQUIPMENT OPER
RADIO SERVICE
< *>
$.795.74*
128625
07/20/92
$79.88
DIVERSIFIED CLEANING
REPAIRS
1122
VERNON OCCUPAN
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$79.88*
128626
07/20/92
$220.00
DORSEY & WHITNEY
LEGAL
062392
GC CIP.
CIP
< *>
$220.00*
128627
07/20/92
$366.72
DPC INDUSTRIES
CHEMICALS
00916299
POOL OPERATION
CHEMICALS
< *>
$366.72*
128628.07/20/92
$310.83
DRUMMOND AM CORP
GENERAL SUPPLIES
5046364
SIDEWALKS & PA
GENERAL SUPPL
2318
< *>
$310.83*
128629
07/20/92
$273.26
E KRAEMER & SONS INC
GENERAL SUPLLIES
27029
DISTRIBUTION
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$273.26*
128630
07/20/92
$200.24
E =Z -GO TEXTRON
REPAIR PARTS
276558
GOLF CARS
REPAIR PARTS
2668
< *>
$200.24*
128631
07/20/92
$163.20
EAGLE WINE
BEER
581562
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
.07/20/92
$132.42
EAGLE WINE
MIX
58156.1
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS .MI
07/20/9 2
$87.89
EAGLE WINE
MIX
.583333
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$383.51*
129632
07/20/92
. $149.01
EARL F. ANDERSON
STRIPE PAINT
115684
STREET NAME SI
PAINT
2348
07/20/92
$149.10
EARL F. ANDERSON.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
16129
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
2610
07/20/92
$180.95
EARL F. ANDERSON
GENERAL_SUPPLIES
116496
RANGE
GENERAL SUPPL
2881
c *>
$479.06*
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 8
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128633
07/20/92
$12,588.73
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
BEER
JUNE /130
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$209.70
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
MIX
JUNE /130
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$6,824.20
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
BEER
070192/5
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$124.30
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
MIX
070192 //5
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$451.90
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
MIX
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$12,520.20
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
BEER
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
< *>
$32;719.03*
128634
07/20/92
$85.00
ECOLAB PEST ELIM.
PEST CONTROL
1873802
BUILDING & GRO
SVC CONTR. EQU
07/20/92
$100.00
ECOLAB PEST ELIM.
PEST CONTROL
1873798
BUILDING & GRO
SVC CONTR.EQU
< *>
$185.00*
128635
07/20/92
$300.00
EDINA COUNTRY CLUB G
ADVERTISING
070192
GOLF DOME
ADVERT OTHER
< *>
$300.00*
128636
07/20/92
$408.00
EDINA GARDEN COUNCIL
GENERAL SUPPLIES
MAY 1992
STREET REVOLVI
GENERAL SUPPL
2727
< *>
$408.00*
128637
07/20/92
5636.00
EON LITE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
38024
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
2647
< *>
$636.00*
128638
07/20/92
$971.28
ESS BROS & SONS
FRAME & BOXES
005457
GENERAL STORM
CASTINGS
2615
07/20/92
$942.53
ESS BROS & SONS
MANHOLE COVERS
005468
SEWER TREATMEN
PIPE
2637
< *>
$1,913.81*
128639
07/20/92
$31.94
EWALD, TONY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
071392
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
'$31.94*
128640
07/20/92
$56.00
FACILITY SYSTEMS
CONSTRUCTION SR CENTE
70936
PARKS
CIP
< *>
$56.00*
128641
07/20/92
$29.36
FAST-1 HOUR PHOTO
GENERAL SUPPLIES
06834
ADMINISTRATION
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$29.36*
128642
07/20/92
393.63
FAST FRAME
OFFICE SUPPLIES
947752
ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE SUPPLI
2972
< *>
$93.63*
128643
07/20/92
$144.00
FAUVER
REPAIR PARTS
870924
BUILDING & GRO
REPAIR PARTS
2590
< *>
$144.00*
128644
07/20/92
$18.08
FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASS
BOOKS & PHAMPHLETS.
1679
FIRE DEPT. GEN
BOOKS & PHAMP
< *>
$18.08*
128645
07/20/92
$103,597.50
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST -50TH
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$131,725.00
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST - EDINBOR
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$100,000.00
FIRST TRUST
BOND PAYABLE EDINBOUR
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$38,750.00
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST
23 -83325
IBR •2 PROG
INTEREST BOND
07/20/92
$250,000.00
FIRST TRUST
BOND PRINCIPAL
23 -83325
IBR #2 PROG `
BOND PRINCIPL
07/20/92
$60112.50
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST GRANDVI
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$100,,000.00
FIRST TRUST
BOND PRINCIPAL GRANDV
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$269,281.25
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST CENT LA
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$303,918.75
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST CENT LA
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$244,087.50
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST CENT LA
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$53,615.00
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST
23 -83325
GENERAL STORM
INTEREST BOND
07/20/92
$26,807.50
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST
23 -83325
GENERAL(BILLIN
INTEREST BOND
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 9
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128645
07/20/92
$54,630.00
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST
23 -83325
IBR #2 PROG
INTEREST BOND
07/20/92
$363,506.25
FIRST TRUST
BOND INTEREST CENT.LA
23 -83325
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
Sk>
$2,100,031.25*
128646
07/20/92
$82.05
FLOYD LOCK & SAFE CO
GENERAL SUPPLIES
77376
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
2335
07/20/92
$2,357:62
FLOYD LOCK & SAFE CO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1696 -92
CDBG
PROF SERVICES
2529
< *>
$2,439.67*
128647
07/20/92
$289.71
FORESTRY SUPPLIERS I
TOOLS.
396783 -0
CENTENNIAL LAK
TOOLS
2739
<*>
$289.71*
128648
07/20/92
$49.82
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
062692/C
CENTENNIAL.LAK.LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$761.97
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
062692
BUILDING MAINT
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$1,114.83
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
062692
GENERAL MAINT
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$425.59
G & K SERVICES
CLEANING SUPPLIES
062692
PW BUILDING
CLEANING SUPP
07/20/92
$753.06
G &,K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
062692
PUMP & LIFT ST
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
$249.42
G & K SERVICES
LAUNDRY
062692
EQUIPMENT OPER
LAUNDRY
07/20/92
.$120.53
G & K SERVICES.
LAUNDRY
062692
ARENA BLDG /GRO
LAUNDRY .
< *>
$3,475.22*
128649
07/20/92
$106.56
G T PARTS
REPAIR PARTS
08188
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2470
< *>
$106.56*
.
128650
07/20/92
$45.00
'6ADEN, MELANIE
AC INSTRUCTOR
071392
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$45.00*
128651
07/20/92
$148.17
GARTNER REFRIG INC.
REPAIRS
008126
ARENA ICE MAIN
CONTR REPAIRS
2696
< *>
$148.17*
128652
07/20/92
$27.19
GARVENS GREETING
GIFT BAGS
2557
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$27.19*
128653
07/20/92
$33.00
GEM TAP SERV
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
063092
GRILL
CST OF GDS BE
< *>
$33.00*
128654
07/20/92
$700.00
GENERAL GROWTH MANAG
RENT
070792
FIRE DEPT. GEN
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$700.00*
128655
07/20/92
$144.85
GENERAL SPORTS
POOL UNIFORMS
034519
POOL OPERATION
LAUNDRY
< *>
$144.85*
128656
07/20/92
$522.50
GEREBI, LIZ
SERVICES
070792
ADMINISTRATION
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$522.50*
128657
07/20/92
$35.24
GIBBOBNS - KEARNS INC
GENERAL SUPPLIES .2540
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL SUPPL
2911
< *>
$35.24*
128658
07/20/92
$105.04
GOLF CAR MIDWEST
REPAIR PARTS
8159
GOLF CARS
REPAIR PARTS
2522
07/20/92
$15.82
GOLF CAR MIDWEST
REPAIR PARTS
8193
GOLF CARS
REPAIR PARTS
2576
07/20/92
$7.43
GOLF CAR MIDWEST
REPAIR PARTS
8255
GOLF CARS
REPAIR PARTS
2665
< *>
$128.29*
128659.07/20/92
$139.00
GOPHER MEDICAL SUPPL
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
13851
CDBG
PROF SERVICES
2916
< *>
$139.00*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 10
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128660
07/20/92
$243.09
GOPHER OIL CO.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
461576
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2813
< *>
$243.09*
128661
07/20/92
$26.50
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
104 -4683
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPL
2403
07/20/92
$79.12
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO.
REPAIR PARTS
472240
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
2539
< *>
$105.62*
128662
07/20/92
$8,798.00
GREUPNER, JOE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
071492
ADMINISTRATION
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$8,798.00*
128663
07/20/92
$489.00
GROUP HEALTH INC
QRTLY PYMT S SLAWSON
070292
CENT SVC GENER
HOSPITALIZATI
< *>
$489.00*
128664
07/20/92
$652.00
GRUBERS POWER EQUIP
REPAIR PARTS
14400
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1990
07/20/92
$39.41
GRUBERS POWER EQUIP
REPAIR PARTS
15134
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2721
< *>
$691.41*
128665
07/20/92
$775.65
HALLMAN
LUBRICANTS
131419
EQUIPMENT OPER
LUBRICANTS
2423
< *>
$775.65*
128666
07/20/92
$560.50
HARDRIVES
CONSTR. IN PROGRESS
91 -16 FI
STREET IMPROV.
CIP
< *>
$560.50*
128667
07/20/92.
5459.43 •
HARMON GLASS & GLAZE
REPAIRS
40620056
BUILDING MAINT
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$459.43*
128668
07/20/92
$129,171.00
HARRIS HOMEYER CO.
PREMIUM
070192
CENT SVC GENER
INSURANCE
< *>
$129,171.00*
128669
07/20/92
$160.00
HAYWA, PHYLLIS
AC INSTRUCTOR
071392
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$160.00 *.
128670
07/20/92
$887.200
HEDGES, DIANA
CRAFT SUPPLIES
07.1392
ART CENTER ADM
CRAFT SUPPLIE
*
*
128671
07/20/92
$810.42
HEIMARK FOODS
COST OF GOODS SOLD FO
063092 /G.GRILL
CST OF GD F00
9033
< *>
$810.42*
128672
07/20/92
$90.62
HELENA CHEMICAL COMP
FERTILIZER
048521
CENTENNIAL LAK
FERTILIZER
2663
< *>
$90.62*
128673
07/20/92
$127.68
HENNEPIN COUNTY SHER
WORKHOUSE /JAIL
062492
LEGAL SERVICES
BRD & RM PRIS
< *>
$127.68*
128674
07/20/92
$278.10
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREA
RUBBISH REMOVAL
20792
TREES & MAINTE
RUBBISH REMOV
< *>
$278.10*
128675
07/20/92
$4,926.21
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREA
WORKHOUSE /JAIL
000683.
LEGAL SERVICES
BRD & RM PR IS
< *>
$4,926.21*
128676
07/20/92
$76.00
HENNEPIN COUNTY
HAZ WASTE LICENSE
062292
SUPERV. & OVRH
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$76.00*
128677
07/20/92
$1,082.92
HIGHLAND ELECTRIC IN
CONSTRUCTION
2971
POOL CIP
CIP
< *>
$1,082.92*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU. JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 11
CHECK#
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
128678
07/20/92
$395.00
HIRSHFIELD'S PAINT M
FIELD PAINT
23787
FIELD MAINTENA
LINE MARK POW
2611
< *>
$395.00*
128679
07/20/92
$100.00
HOFFMAN- WILLIAM
POLICE
SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00'
128680
07/20/92
$17.04
HOOTENS
LAUNDRY
061792
POLICE DEPT. G
LAUNDRY
< *>
$17.04*
128681
07/20/92
$475.00
HORIZON PRO SOUND IN
SOUND PRODUCTION
/JAMB
070292
CENTENNIAL LAK
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$475.00*
128682
07/20/92
$1,056.00
HORWATH, TOM
PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES
071492
TREES & MAINTE
PROF SERVICES
07/20/92
$109.76
HORWATH, TOM
MILEAGE
OR ALLOWANCE
071492
TREES & MAINTE
MILEAGE
< *>
$1,165.76*
128683
07/20/92
$28.50
HUMPHREY RADIATOR
REPAIR
PARTS
062992
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2699
< *>
$28.50*
128684
07/20/92
$115.38
HYDRO SUPPLY CO
REPAIR
PARTS
4790
METER REPAIR
REPAIR PARTS
8536
07/20/92
$4,016.16
HYDRO SUPPLY CO
WATER METERS
4797
UTILITY PROG
INVENTORY WAT
8536
< *>
$4,131.54*
128685
07/20/92
$78.17
ICS WAREHOUSE INC
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
49506
COMMUNICATIONS
GENERAL SUPPL
2194
< *>
$78.17*
128686
07/20/92
$79.,45
INTERIOR COM SYS
SERVICE
CONTRACT
038358
BUILDING & GRO
SVC CONTR EQU
07/20/92
$313.65
INTERIOR COM SYS
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
038357
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPL
1670
< *>
$393.10*
128687
07/20/92
$483.25
INTERNATIONAL CONFER
BOOKS
070692
INSPECTIONS
DUES & SUBSCR
< *>
$483.25*
128688
07/20/92
$40.00
JANET CANTON
MILEAGE
/LOGIS
7/1 -7/14
FINANCE
MILEAGE.
< *>
$40.00*
128690
07/20/92
$81.52
JERRYS HARDWARE
CLEANING SUPPLIES
062592
POOL OPERATION
CLEANING SUPP
07/20/92
$23.33
JERRYS HARDWARE
REPAIR
PARTS
062592
BUILDING MAINT
REPAIR PARTS
07/20/92
$366.85
JERRYS HARDWARE
TOOLS
062592
PUMP & LIFT ST
TOOLS -
07/20/92
$420.79
JERRYS HARDWARE
TOOLS
062592
GENERAL MAINT
TOOLS
07/20/92
$596.00
JERRYS HARDWARE
TOOLS
062592
BUILDING MAINT
TOOLS
07/20/92
$27.49
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
DISTRIBUTION .
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$16.22
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
GUN RANGE
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$230.55
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$31.33
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$489.27
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$136.65..
JERRYS HARDWARE.
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$153.85
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES /HRA
062592
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$187.03
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
CITY HALL GENE
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$111.11
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
SKATING & HOCK
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$17.29
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
ENGINEERING GE
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$256.37
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592.
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
.$71.84
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$3.99
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
PUBLIC HEALTH
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$96.82
JERRYS. HARDWARE
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
062592
ADMINISTRATION
GENERAL SUPPL
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 12
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
---------------------------
128690
07/20/92
-------------------------
$59.72
- - - -
JERRYS HARDWARE
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062592
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$24.37
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062592
YORK. OCCUPANCY
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$60.83
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062592
STREET NAME SI
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$15.28
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062592
ST LIGHTING OR
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$20.43
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062592
STREET REVOLVI
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$4.86
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062592
PW BUILDING
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$57.59
JERRYS HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
062592
POLICE DEPT. G
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$3,561.58*
128691
07/20/92
889.85
JERRYS PRINTING
PRINTING
C12066(4
PARK- ADMIN.
PRINTING
< *>
$89.85"
128692
07/20/92
$472.86
JIM HATCH SALES
TUBE BROOMS
1540
STREET CLEANIN
BROOMS
2488
< *>
$472.86*
128693
07/20/92
$118.64
JOHN H. FOSTER
PANEL MOUNT
1211408-
PAVEMENT MARKI
PAINT
2613
07/20/92
$59.64
JOHN H. FOSTER
REPAIR PARTS
1211408-
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
-
2613
<*>
5178.28"
-
128694
07/20/92
$100.00
JOHNSON WALTER
POLICE.SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
128695
07/20/92
$89.37,
NAOMI
CRAFT SUPPLIES
073892
ART CENTER ADM
CRAFT SUPPLIE
07/20/92
$40.83
JOHNSON, NAOMI
ADVERTISING
070892
ART CENTER ADM
ADVERT OTHER
07/20/92
$38.95
JOHNSON, NAOMI
GENERAL SUPPLIES
070892
ART CENTER BLD
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$169.15*
128696
07/20/92
$36.00
KANE, BOB
CLASS REFUND
070892
ART CENTER ADM
REGISTRATION
< *>
$36.00*
128697
07/20/92
$92.50
KIBORT, ANDY
AC OFFICE ADMINISTRAT
071392
ART CENTER ADM
SALARIES TEMP
< *>
$92.50*
128698
07/20/92
$99.22
KNOX COMM CREDIT
GENERAL.SUPPLIES
022140
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
2418
07/20/92
$168.20
KNOX COMM CREDIT
REPAIR PARTS
022227
CITY HALL GENE
REPAIR PARTS
2431
07/20/92
$69.98
KNOX COMM CREDIT
STRIP
022817
BRIDGES GUARD
GUARD RAIL MA
2546
07/20/92
$146.35
KNOX COMM CREDIT
REPAIRS
023121
ARENA BLDG /GRO
CONTR REPAIRS
2642
07/20/92
$19.55
KNOX COMM CREDIT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
023324
BUILDINGS
GENERAL SUPPL
2627
07/20/92
$29.78
KNOX COMM CREDIT
TOOLS
023594
BUILDING MAINT
TOOLS
2680
07/20/92
$46.90
KNOX COMM CREDIT
TOOLS
023569
BUILDING MAINT
TOOLS
2684
07/20/92
$471.26
KNOX COMM CREDIT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
023945
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
2810
< *>
$1,051.24*
128699
07/20/92
$45.91
KOALA BEAR KARE /JBJ
GENERAL SUPPLIES
023409
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$45.91*
128700
07/20/92
$880.13
KOKESH ATHLETIC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
063092.
ATHLETIC ACTIV
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$880.13*
128701
07/20/92
$26.00
KOTTOM, TAMMY
CLASS REFUND
070892
ART CENTER ADM
REGISTRATION
< *>
826.00*
128702
07/20/92
$38.00
KRANTZ, VAL
CLASS REFUND
070892
ART CENTER ADM
REGISTRATION'
< *>
$38.00"
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER. THU, JUL
16, 1992- 9:34 PM
page 13
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=-------------------------------
128703
07/20/92
$259.86
KREMER SPRING & ALIG
REPAIR PARTS
039145
EQUIPMENT. OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2678
< *>
$259.86*
128704
07/20/92
$15.00
KRETZMAN, KIM
REFUND/ PEE WEE TENNI
071392
GENERAL FD PRO
REGISTRATION
< *>
$15.00*
128705
07/20/92
$12,770.05
KUETHER DIST_ CO.
BEER
JUNE /152
YORK SELLING
CST OF. GDS BE
07/20/92
$70.00
KUETHER DIST. CO.
BEER
JUNE /152
VERNON SELLING
CST'OF GDS BE
< *>
$12,840.05*
128706
07/20/92_
$775.50
LABOR RELATIONS ASN.
FEE FOR SERVICE
070192
ADMINISTRATION
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$775.50*
128707
07/20/92.
$212.04
LACAL EQUIPMENT INC
REPAIR PARTS
9206381
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2238
< *>
$212.04*
128708
07/20/92
$138.00
LAKE RESTORATION INC
LAKE WEED CONTROL
977 /JUNE
PONDS & LAKES
PROF SERVICES
2772
07/20/92
$230.00
LAKE RESTORATION INC
LAKE WEED CONTROL
3309
PONDS & LAKES
PROF SERVICES
2771
07/20/92
$1,345.00
LAKE RESTORATION INC
LAKE WEED CONTROL
592/6/29
PONDS & LAKES
PROF SERVICES
2770
07/20/92
$363.00
LAKE RESTORATION INC
LAKE TREATMENT
2620 1
PONDS & LAKES
PROF SERVICES
2788
07/20/92
$179.00
LAKE RESTORATION INC
LAKE TREATMENT
2724/JUL
PONDS & LAKES
PROF SERVICES
2787
07/20/92
$110.00
LAKE RESTORATION INC
LAKE WEED CONTROL
3211
PONDS & LAKES
PROF SERVICES
2773
< *>
$2,365.00* „
128709
07/20/92
$442. -24
LAKELAND ENGINEERING
REPAIR PARTS
L -82460
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
1925
< *>
$442.24*
128710
07/20/92
$61.24
LANDSCAPE PROD CTR.
PLANTS
501926
MAINT OF COURS
PLANT & TREES
2523
< *>
$61.24*
128711
07/20/92
$409.55
LAWSON PRODUCTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1756615
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
1859
07/20/92
$273.23
LAWSON PRODUCTS
REPAIR PARTS
1766287
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2179
07/20/92
$482.96
LAWSON PRODUCTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1767201
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
2178
07/20/92
$197.62
LAWSON PRODUCTS
TOOLS
1770364
EQUIPMENT OPER
TOOLS
2331
07/20/92
$31..08
LAWSON PRODUCTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1770365
ST LIGHTING OR
GENERAL SUPPL
2332
07/20/92
$293.91
LAWSON PRODUCTS
TOOLS
17717464
DISTRIBUTION
TOOLS
2330
< *>
$1,688.35*
128712
07/20/92
$170.00
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
FEE
10428
CENT SVC GENER
INSURANCE
< *>
$170.00*
128713
07/20/92
$24.33
LEEF BROS. INC..
LAUNDRY
063092
MAINT OF COURS-LAUNDRY
< *>
$24.33*
128714
07/20/92
$357.88
LEITNER COMPANY
SOIL
133568
MAINT OF COURS
SOD & DIRT
2359
< *>
$357.88*
128715
07/20/92
$198.00
LEMCO HYDRAULICS
CYLINDER
061792
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2484
07/20/92
$198.00
LEMCO HYDRAULICS
REPAIR PARTS
061892
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2507
$396.00*
128716
07/20/92
$388.00
LETN
CONT ED
69650
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF & SCHOOL
07/20/92
$388.00
LETN
CONT ED
73773
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF & SCHOOL
< *>
$776.00*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL
16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page.14
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
-
- - - -- DESCRIPTION
- -- -
INVOICE
PROGRAM -_
- - - - --
- -- OBJECT P.O. #
-------- - - - - --
-----------------------------------
128717
07/20/92
$50.00
- - - -- -------- - -
LICHTENAUER, LYNNE
_--------------------
PROFESSIONAL SVC
OT
071292
ADMINISTRATION
PRO SVC OTHER
<*>
-
$50.00*
128718
07/20/92
$98.82
LIEN INFECTION CON
SANITATION
070192
GRILL
PROF SERVICES 9035
< *>
$98.82*
128719
07/20/92
$4.05
LINHOFF
PHOTO
215963
ADMINISTRATION
PHOTO SUPPLIE
< *>
$4.05*
128720
07/20/92
$4,188.73
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
069227,0
FINANCE
DATA PROCESSI
07/20/92
$2,883.71
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
069227,0
ASSESSING
DATA PROCESSI
07/20/92
$2,243.84
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
069227,0
GENERAL(BILLIN
DATA PROCESSI
07/20/92
$14.08
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
069227,0
GENERAL FD PRO
DUE FROM HRA
07/20/92
$366.47
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
069227,0
LIQUOR 50TH ST
DATA PROCESSI
07/20/92
$366.47
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
069227,0
LIQUOR YORK GE
DATA PROCESSI
07/20/92
$366.48
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
069227,0
VERNON LIQUOR
DATA PROCESSI
< *>
$10,429.78*
128721
07/20/92
$30.00
LU- LAWSOM, JUDITH W
REFUND SWIMMING
070892
GENERAL FD PRO
REGISTRATION
< *>
$30.00"
128722
07/20/92
$113.30
LYNDE CO
REPAIR PARTS
66191
FIELD MAINTENA
REPAIR PARTS 2606
< *>
$113.30* "
128723
07/20/92
$544.88
M AMUNDSON
CIGARETTES
CIGARETTES
13648
13745
VERNON SELLING
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
07/20/92.
$221.01
$174.33
M AMUNDSON
M AMUNDSON
CIGARETTES
13797
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$387.00
M AMUNDSON
CIGARETTES
13870
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$203.60
M AMUNDSON
CIGARETTES
13885
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$1,530.82*
128724
07/20/92
$75.00
M.I.A.M.A.
DUES
062492
ARENA ADMINIST
DUES & SUBSCR
< *>
$75.00*
128725
07/20/92
$250.00
MADSON,JOHN
SERVICES
070792
ADMINISTRATION
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$250.00*
128726
07/20/92
$225.80
MARK VII SALES
MIX
JUNE /VER
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
07/20/92
$9,606.05
$196.35
MARK VII SALES
MARK VII SALES
BEER
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
JUNE /YOR
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$10,443.95
MARK VII SALES
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
JUNE /YOR
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$68.00
MARK VII..SALES
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
JUNE /50T
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$5,359.65
MARK VII SALES
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
JUNE /50T
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BE
< *>
$25,899.80*
128727
07/20/92
$126.00
MCCARTHY, LOWELL
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE
071492
PARK ADMIN.
MILEAGE
< *>
$126.00*
128728
07/20/92
$387.60
MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY
REPAIR PARTS
070192/G
070192
MAINT OF COURS
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
TOOLS
07/20/92
07/20/92
$418.55
$1,146.94
MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY
MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY
TOOLS
PARTS
070192
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
07/20/92
4183.52
MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY
SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
GENERAL SUPPLIES
070192
070192
EQUIPMENT OPER
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPL
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
07/20/92
$491.82
$32.95
MCGUIRE AUTO
MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY
REPAIR PARTS
070192
YORK OCCUPANCY
REPAIR PARTS
07/20/92
$3,414.61
MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY
REPAIR PARTS
070192
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16,4992, 9:34 PM
page 15
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
< *>
$6,075.99*
128729
07/20/92
$387.41
MCNEILUS STEEL
REPAIR PARTS
0122524
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
2346
07/20/92
$358.77
MCNEILUS STEEL
REPAIR PARTS
013664
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2493
< *>
$746.18*
128730
07/20/92
$100.00
MERFELD -BERT
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE, PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
128731
07/20/92
$1,052.22
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30359
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2527
07/20/92
$2,337.50
MERIT SUPPLY
ACCESSORIES
30360
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2421
07/20/92
$649.83
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30360
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPL
2421
07/20/92
$348.52
MERIT SUPPLY
TRUCK WASH
30367
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2542
07/20/92
$166.35
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30386
MAINT.OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPL
2596
07/20/92.
$208.74
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30415
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL SUPPL
2691
07/20/92
$492.66
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30423
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2749
07/20/92
$285.42
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30428
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
2703
07/20/92
$497.88
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30482
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2838
< *>
$6,039.12*
128732
07/20/92
$134.83
MESSERLI & KRAMER
AMBULANCE FEES
5182 -01
GENERAL FD PRO
AMBULANCE FEE
< *>
$134.83*
128733
07/20/92
$35.00 :'METRO
LEGAL SERVICES
ABSTRACT TITLE SEARCH
321902
CDBG PROG
FEDERAL AID
2674
< *>
$35.00 *.
128734
07/20/92
$3,465.00
METRO WASTE CONTROL
SAC CHARGE
JUNE 199
GENERAL FD PRO
BUILDING PERM
< ">
$3,465.00*
128735
07/20/92
$35.20
METZ BAKING CO
HOT DOG BUNS
062792
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD FOO
07/20/92
$189.24
METZ BAKING CO
COST OF GOODS SOLD FO
062792/G
GRILL
CST OF.GD F00
07/20/92
$232.30
METZ BAKING CO
COST OF GOODS SOLD FO
070492/G
GRILL
CST OF GD F00
9037
< *>
$456.74*
128736
07/20/92
$2,944.00
MGA
HANDICAP SERVICE
45 -904 -1
GOLF PROG
COMPUTR HANDI
< *>
$2,944.00*
128737
07/20/92
$128.89
MIDWEST ASPHALT COR..
ASPHALT
1333
DISTRIBUTION
BLACKTOP
1367
07/20/92
$395.72
MIDWEST ASPHALT COR.
ASPHALT
1333
STREET RENOVAT
DUMPING CHARG
07/20/92
$2,391.19
MIDWEST ASPHALT COR.
ASPHALT
7690
GENERAL MAINT
BLACKTOP
07/20/92
$7,627.56
MIDWEST ASPHALT COR.
ASPHALT
7690
STREET RENOVAT
BLACKTOP
07/20/92
$1,119.84
MIDWEST ASPHALT COR.
ASPHALT
7690.
DISTRIBUTION
BLACKTOP
07/20/92
$864.42
MIDWEST ASPHALT COR.
ASPHALT
7690
STREET RENOVAT
MACH. & EQUIP
< *>
$12,527.62*
128738
07/20/92
$13.55
MIDWEST FENCE & MFG
REPAIR .PARTS
.061187
BUILDING MAINT
REPAIR PARTS
2705.
< *>
$13.55*
128739
07/20/92
$12.95
MIDWEST MACHINERY IN
REPAIR PARTS
8304
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
07/20/92
$112.00
MIDWEST MACHINERY IN
REPAIR PARTS
8662.
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2565
< *>
$124.95*
1287.40
07/20/92
$130.20
MIDWEST VENDING WHSL
FOOD
070692
GRILL
CST.OF GD F00.
<*>
5130.20*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16. 1992, 9:34 PM
page 16
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
---------------------------------------------------------------=----------------------------------------------------------------_-=--
128741
07/20/92
$362.74
MILLIPORE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
449801
LABORATORY
GENERAL SUPPL
2307
-
<*>
$362.74*
-
128742
07/20/92
$38.29
MILWAUKEE TOOL CO.
TOOLS
25 -39 -45
GENERAL MAINT
TOOLS
2538
< *>
$38.29*
128743
07/20/92
$203.50
MINN COMM PAGING
PAGING SERVICE
070192
BUILDING & GRO
SVC CONTR EQU
2809
< *>
$203.50*
128744
07/20/92
$48.55
MINNEAPOLIS SPOKESMA
ADVERTISING
A -18528
CENT SVC GENER
ADVERT PERSON
< *>
$48.55*
128745
07/20/92
$425.00.
MINNETONKA IRON WORK
SHARED.MAINTENANCE
2581
MAINT OF COURS
SHARED MAINT
2968
< *>
$425.00*
128746
07/20/92
$29.92
MN BRICK.AND TILE CO
GENERAL SUPPLIES
20613
GENERAL STORM
GENERAL SUPPL
2191
< *>
$29.92*
128747
07/20/92
$30.60
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
FLOOR TAX
070692
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$43.25
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
FLLOR TAX
070692
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS OT
07/20/92
$45.95
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
FLOOR TAX
070692
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI.
< *>
$119.80*
128748
07/20/92
$512.00
MN DEPT OF
FUEL TAX
JUOE
EQUIPMENT OPER
GASOLINE
< *>
$512.00*
128749
07/20/92
$4,346.00
MN STATE TREA /BLG IN
SURCHARGE
JUNE 199
GENERAL FD PRO
BUILDING PERM
< *>
$4,346.00*
128750
07/20/92
$49.92
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
AD FOR BIDS 92 -7
5936
ADMINISTRATION
ADVERTISING L
07/20/92
$2,698.13
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
PRINTING
072792
ADMINISTRATION
PRINTING
07/20/92
$54.08
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
AD FOR BIDS- CONTRACT
6014
ADMINISTRATION
ADVERTISING L
07/20/92
$83.19
MN SUBURBAN NEWS
AD FOR BIDS- CANOPY
6015
ADMINISTRATION
ADVERTISING L
< *>
$2,885.32*
128751
07/20/92
$75.00
MN WOMENS PRESS INC
ADVERTISING
8:7
CENT SVC GENER
ADVERT PERSON
< *>
$75.00*
128752
07/20/92
$104.60
MN. BAR
MIX
JUNE /163
50TH ST.SELLIN
CST.OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$629.27
MN. BAR
MIX
JUNE /163
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$327.48
MN. BAR
MIX
JUNE /163
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$1,061.35*
128753
07/20/92
$925.00
MN. CONWAY
GRILL HOOD
176935
CLUB HOUSE
CLUB HOUSE EQ
1802
< *>
$925.00*
128754
07/20/92
$93.85
MN. ELEVATOR
ELEVATOR.SERVICE
060431
BUILDING & GRO
SVC CONTR EQU
< *>
$93.85*
128755
07/20/92
$130.34
MN. GLOVE
GLOVES
00067696
PUMP & LIFT ST
SAFETY EQUIPM
2336
< *>
$130.34*
128756
07/20/92
$161.95
MN. TORO INC.
REPAIR PARTS
272530
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1912
07/20/92
$54.36
MN. TORO INC.
REPAIR PARTS
273234
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2414
07/20/92
$22.04
MN. TORO INC.
REPAIR PARTS
273602
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2016.
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 17
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.-----
128756
07/20/92
$317.71
MN. TORO INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
276597
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
2653
07/20/92
$21.10
MN. TORO INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
273885
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
1973
07/20/92
- $18.85
MN. TORO INC.
CREDIT
276359
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
1973
07/20/92
$72.95
MN. TORO INC.
REPAIR PARTS
276381
CENTENNIAL LAK
REPAIR PARTS
2644
07/20/92
$63.45
MN. TORO INC.
REPAIR PARTS
277944
CENTENNIAL.LAK
REPAIR PARTS
<*>
$694.71*
128757
07/20/92
$962.21
MODEL STONE
CURBING /CONCRETE
145157
DISTRIBUTION
CONCRETE
2235
07/20/92
$296.06
MODEL STONE
CURBING
145657
DISTRIBUTION
CONCRETE
1369
07/20/92
$345.41
MODEL STONE
CURBING
146079
STREET RENOVAT
CONCRETE
< *>
$1,603.68*
128758
07/20/92
$35.66
MOTOROLA INC
EQUIP MAINT
W2233104
POLICE DEPT. G
EQUIP MAINT
07/20/92
$134.19
MOTOROLA INC
EQUIP MAINT
00199413
POLICE DEPT. G
EQUIP MAINT
2509
< *>
$169.85*
128759
07/20/92
$9.0.00
MOTT, LUCY
CLEANING
311568
CLUB HOUSE
PROF SERVICES
2281
< *>
$90.00*
128760
07/20/92
$285.52
MUNICILITE CO
PARTS
3830
EQUI -PMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2532
< *>
$285.52*
12861
07/20/92
$180.00
MUSEUM SERVICES
REPAIRS
41$5
CLUB HOUSE
CONTR REPAIRS
2366
R ..
128762
07/20/92
$5.77
NAPA AUTO PARTS
REPAIR PARTS
811293
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2604
07/20/92
$123.90
NAPA AUTO PARTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
812440
PW BUILDING
GENERAL SUPPL
2554
07/20/92
$62.17
NAPA AUTO PARTS
REPAIR PARTS
812755
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2560
< *>
$191.84*
128763
07/20/92
$406.35
NEBCO /L.L. DISTRIBUT
CONCESSIONS
070192
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD F00
07/20/92
$159.85
NERCO /L.L. DISTRIBUT
CONCESSIONS
549320
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GO F00
07/20/92
$246.76
NEBCO /L.L. DISTRIBUT
COST OF GOODS SOLD FO
550221
CENTENNIAL LAK
CST OF GD F00
< *>
$812.96*
128764
07/20/92
$205.45
NIBBE, MICHAEL
CONT ED
070292
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF. & SCHOOL
< *.>
$205.45*
128765
07/20/92
$181.00
NICKLOW, LIA
PT MAINT AC
.071392
ART CENTER BLD
SALARIES TEMP
< *>
$181.00*
128766
07/20/92
$100.00
NISSEN DICK
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
12 67
07/20/92
$65.70 0 NO
STAR TURF
REPAIR PARTS
470520
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2753
8
R
128768
07/20/92
$
NORTHERN AIRE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
4457
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPL
2783
$29.44*
128769
07/20/92
$50.24
NORTHERN
REPAIR PARTS.
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2754
<*>
__ $50.24*
_
128770
07/20/92
$59.38
NORTHLAND ELECTRIC S
GENERAL SUPPLIES
795473
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPL
2341
07/20/92
$664.80
NORTHLAND ELECTRIC S
CONSTR. IN PROGRESS
778339
POOL. CIP
CIP
2963
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 18
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
< *>
$724.18*
128771
07/20/92
$329.52
NORTHSTAR ICE
ICE
JUNE /168
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$430.44
NORTHSTAR ICE
ICE
JUNE /168
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20•/92
$556.80
NORTHSTAR ICE
ICE
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
c ■>
$1,316.76*
128773
07/20/92
$452.40
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
GENERAL MAINT
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$5.67
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
ST LIGHTING OR
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
52,222.53
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$356.71
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
PONDS &LAKES
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$115.65
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
PONDS & LAKES
LIGHT .& POWER
07/20/92
$2,019.09
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
PARKING RAMP
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$36.66
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
CIVIL DEFENSE
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$23.49
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
CITY HALL GENE
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$1,515.18
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
PW BUILDING
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$557.83
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
ART CENTER BLD
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$541.85
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
BUILDING MAINT
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$2,780.49
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
CLUB HOUSE
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$5.46
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
MAINT OF COURS
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$826.17
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
POOL OPERATION
LIGHT &.POWER
07/20/92
$132.66
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
ARENA BLDG /GRO
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$201.52
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07 92
GUN RANGE
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$2,317.90
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
0792
PUMP & LIFT ST
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$5,110.34
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
DISTRIBUTION
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$690.49
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
50TH ST OCCUPA
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$1,064.62
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
YORK OCCUPANCY
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$569.76
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
VERNON OCCUPAN
LIGHT & POWER
07/20/92
$29.64
NSP
LIGHT &
POWER
07292
GOLF DOME
LIGHT & POWER
< *>
$21,576.11*
128774
07/20/92
$580.35
O.M. SCOTT & SONS CO
FERTILIZER
83881
MAINT OF COURS
FERTILIZER
2528
< *>
$580.35*
128775
07/20/92
$315.00
OFFSET PRINTING
PRINTING
32326
POLICE DEPT. G
PRINTING
.2149
07/20/92
$629.30
OFFSET PRINTING
PRINTING
32325
POLICE DEPT. G
PRINTING
2136
07/20/92
$345.00
OFFSET PRINTING
PRINTING
32327
POLICE DEPT. G
PRINTING
2149
< *>
$1,289.30*
128776
07/20/92
$261.20
OLD DUTCH FOODS
COST OF
GOODS SOLD FO
062692
GRILL
CST OF GD .F00
9038
< *>
$261.20*
128777
07/20/92
$148.00
OTIS SPUNKMEYER INC
COOKIES
7720
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD F00
07/20/92
$74.00
OTIS SPUNKMEYER INC
COOKIES
7850
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD F00
07/20/92
$148.00
OTIS SPUNKMEYER INC
COOKIES
7897
GRILL
CST OF GD F00
9041
07/20/92
$118.00
OTIS SPUNKMEYER INC
COST OF
GOODS SOLD FO
7890
CENTENNIAL LAK
CST OF GD F00
< *>
$488.00*
128778
07/20/92
$650.00
PARASOLE RESTAURANT
REFUND /REPLACED LOST
070692
GENERAL FD PRO
BUILDING PERM
< *>
$650.00*
128779
07/20/92
$804.42
PAT GREER
SERVICES
070792
ADMINISTRATION
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$804.42*
128780
07/20/92
$293.35
PATRICK & COMPANY
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
20855
ANIMAL CONTROL
GENERAL SUPPL
2748
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU. JUL 16, 19.92, 9:34 PM
page 19
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
----------------------------------------=---------------=------------------7---------------------------------------------------------
< *>
$293.35*
128781
07/20/92
$54,586.53
PENN CONTRACTING INC
CONSTR. IN PROGRESS
92 -4 PAY
SANITARY SEWER
CIP
c *>
$54,586.53*
128782
07/20/92
$218.00
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING
POP
26303509
POOL CONCESSIO
CST OF GD F00
07/20/92
$295.15
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING
MIX
JUNE /172
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$277.55
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING
MIX
JUNE /172
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$146.00
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING
COST OF GOODS SOLD
063092
CENTENNIAL LAK
CST OF GD FOO
07/20/92
$2,531.40
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING
PEPSI
063092/G
GRILL
CST OF GD F00
< *>
$3,468.10*
128783
07/20/92
$411.45
PETE LOYD CO
AERATION OF GREENS
060192
MAINT OF COURS
SVC CONTR EQU
2143
07/20/92
$482.30
PETE LOYD CO
AERATION CONTRACTED
2824
MAINT OF COURS
SVC'CONTR EQU
< *>
$893.75*
128784
07/20/92
536:47
PETERSON, BARBARA
OFFICE SUPPLIES
070992
ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE SUPPLI
07/20/92
$69.63
PETERSON, BARBARA
GENERAL SUPPLIES
070992
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$10.90
PETERSON, BARBARA
COST OF GOODS SOLD FO
070992
CENTENNIAL LAK
CST OF GD F00
< *>
$117.00*
128785
07/20/92
$16.53
PFEIFFER, POLLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
070792
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$16.53*
128786
07/20/92
$238.26
PHYSIO CONTROL
FIRST ADI SUPPLIES /D3
A08487 D
FIRE DEPT. GEN
FIRST AID SUP
1668
< *>.
$238.26*
128787
07/20/92
$279.03
PLANT & FLANGED EQU
REPAIR PARTS
2767
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
2683
< *>
$279.03*
128788
07/20/92
$414.00
PLANT EQUIP INC
EQUIP REPLACE
102405/6
POLICE DEPT. G
.EQUIP REPLACE
2452
c *>
$414.00*
128789
07/20/92
$29.90
PLUNKETTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
424854
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$29.90*
128790
07/20/92
$200.00
POSTMASTER
POSTAGE
070892
CENT SVC GENER
POSTAGE
< *>
$200.00*
128791
07/20/92
$5,000.00
POSTMASTER
POSTAGE
071492
CENT SVC GENER
POSTAGE
< *>
85,000.00*
128792
07/20/92
$20.00
PR NEWSWIRE
ADVERTISING
514117
ADMINISTRATION
ADVERT OTHER
< *>
$20.00*
128793
07/20/92
$300.00
PRECISION TURF /CHEM
SEED
001644
MAINT OF COURS
SOD & DIRT
2752
< *>
$300.00*
128794
07/20/92
$54.00
PRINTERS SERV INC
SHARPENING
74973
ARENA ICE MAIN
EQUIP MAINT
< *r
$54.00*
128795
07/20/92
$27.40
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
WINE
581084
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WIN
07/20/92
$42.07
PRIOR WINE COMPANY,
MIX
581085
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$69.47*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 20
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
--------------------------------------------------------.----------------------------------------------------------------------------
128796
07/20/92
$54.72
QUALITY REFRIG
REPAIRS
082166
GRILL
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$54.72*
128797
07/20/92
$35.78
QUICK SERV BATTERY
FILTER
08589
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2485
07/20/92
$66.20
QUICK SERV BATTERY
REPAIR PARTS
09564
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2567
< *>
$101.98*
128798
07/20/92
$200.34
QUIK PRINT
PRINTING
044473
ADMINISTRATION
PRINTING
2910
< *>
$200.34*
128799
07/20/92
$26,926.55
R P VOGEL AND COMPAN
CONSTR. IN PROGRESS
92 -1 PAY
WATERMAIN
CIP
< *>
$26,926.55*
128800
07/20/92
$194.16
R &R SPECIALTIES INC
REPAIRS
016484
ARENA ICE MAIN
CONTR REPAIRS
2661
< *>
$194.16*
128801
07/20/92
$25.00
RADATZ, DAVID
RETRO PAY /CLOTHING
AL
070292 .
FIRE DEPT. GEN
UNIF ALLOW
<*>
$25.00*
128802
07/20/92
$96.00
RADIO INSTALLS
EQUIPMENT RENTAL
26400
FIRE DEPT. GEN
EQUIP RENTAL
8571
< *>
$96.00*
128803
07/20/92
$46.97
RADIO SHACK ACCT REC
REPAIR PARTS
505,236
BUILDING MAINT
REPAIR PARTS
2712
< *>
$46.97 *,
128804
07/20/92
$125.80
RED WING SHOES
SHOES
287571
DISTRIBUTION
SAFETY EQUIPM
07/20/92
$115.60
RED WING SHOES
GENERAL SUPPLIES
287571
ENGINEERING GE
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$101.15
RED WING SHOES
SHOES
287571
GENERAL MAINT
SAFETY EQUIPM
< *>
$342.55*
128805
07/20/92
$131.00
REEDS SALES & SERV
GENERAL SUPPLIES
13742
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPL
2666
< *>
$131.00*
128806
07/20/92
$350.26
REM SUPPLIES
GENERAL SUPPLIES
01793
POOL TRACK GRE
GENERAL SUPPL
2896
07/20/92
$146.20
REM SUPPLIES
GENERAL SUPPLIES
01789
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
2758
07/20/92
$77.26
REM SUPPLIES
GENERAL SUPPLIES
01796
POOL TRACK GRE
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$573.72*
128807
07/20/92
$7,285.35
REX DISTR.
BEER
JUNE /YOR
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$123.40
REX DISTR.
MIX
JUNE /YOR
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$6,757.65
REX DISTR.
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
JUNE 50T
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$15..65
REX DISTR.
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
JUNE 50T
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$319.80
REX DISTR.
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$10,392.42
REX DISTR.
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
< *>
$24,894.27*
128808
07/20/92
$85.00
RICHARDS, BRIAN
PERFORM CL 6/21/92
062192
ADMINISTRATION
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$85.00*
128809
07/20/92
$1,314.50
RICHFIELD PLUMB CO
BUILDINGS
5952
GUN RANGE PROG
BUILDINGS
2964
< *>
$1,314.50*
128810
07/20/92
$344.54
RITEWAY
REPAIR PARTS
117487 -M
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2687
< *>
$344.54*
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 21
CHECK#
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7--------------
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
128811
07/20/92
$10.30
RITZ CAMERA
GENERAL SUPPLIES
3750703
DISTRIBUTION
GENERAL SUPPL
2495
07/20/92
$11:78
RITZ CAMERA
GENERAL SUPPLIES
3750777
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPL
2501
07/20/92
$35.10
RITZ CAMERA
GENERAL SUPPLIES
3750778
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
2501
<*>
$57.18*
128812
07/20/92
$400.00
ROBERT B. HILL
GENERAL SUPPLIES
49084
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2812
< *>
$400.00*
128813
07/20/92
$1,392:34
ROLLINS OIL CO
GASOLINE
13503
MAINT OF COURS
GASOLINE
9379
07/20/92
$5,076.50
ROLLINS OIL CO
GASOLINE
13400
EQUIPMENT OPER
GASOLINE
2708
07/20/92
$1,354.60
ROLLINS OIL CO
GASOLINE
13623
EQUIPMENT OPER
GASOLINE
2708
< *>
$7,823.44*
128814.07/20/92
$120:00
ROXANNE SEIDEL
SERVICES JULY
070792
ADMINISTRATION
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$120.00*
128815
07/20/92
51,200.00
RTW INC
FEE FOR.SERVICE
063092
CENT SVC GENER
INSURANCE
< *>
$1,200.00*
128816
07/20/92
$66.00'
RUSSELL, ZOE
AC INSTRUCTOR
071392
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$66.00*
128817
07/20/92
$30.00
SANDVICK, PATTI
REFUND / SWIMMING
071392
GENERAL FD PRO
REGISTRATION
< *>
$30.00 *:
128818
07/20/92
$30.00
SCHMECHEL, JANE
PT OFFICE AC
071392
ART CENTER ADM
SALARIES TEMP
< *>
$30.00*
128819
07/20/92
$450.00
SCHUELLER'S PLANT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
063092
STREET REVOLVI
GENERAL SUPPL
1844
< *>
$450.00*
128820
07/20/92
$209-.78
SCHUSTER EQUIPMENT C
REPAIR PARTS
7488
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2441
< *>
$209.78*
128821
07/20/92
$73.44
SEARS
REPAIR PARTS
SR -75 -21
PW BUILDING
REPAIR PARTS
1200
< *>
$73.44*
128822
07/20/92
$208.08
SEELYE PLASTICS
REPAIR PARTS
225293
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2720
< *>
$208.08*
128823
07/20/92
$172.50
SHELP, NANCY
AC INSTRUCTOR
071392
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
<*>
$172.50*
128824
07/20/92
$100.00
SHEPARD JOHN
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
128825
07/20/92
$103.27
SHERWIN WILLIAMS
PAINT
7039 -4
STREET NAME SI
PAINT
2089
07/20/92
- $103.27
SHERWIN WILLIAMS
CREDIT
7418 -0
STREET NAME SI
PAINT
07/20/92
$271.60
SHERWIN.WILLIAMS
PAINT
7872 -8
STREET NAME SI
PAINT
2427
< *>
$271.60*
128826.07/20/92
$130.80
SIGN -TIFIC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
018976
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
2897
< *>
$130.80*
128827
07/20/92
$24.95
SOUTHERN VACUUM
VACUUM REPAIR
4938
50TH ST OCCUPA
SVCS CUSTODIA
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, -.JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 22
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<*>
$24.95*
128828
07/20/92
$93.28
SOUTHHAM BUSINESS CO
ADVERTISING
CPCC1856
ADMINISTRATION
ADVERT OTHER
07/20/92
$114.48
SOUTHHAM BUSINESS CO
AD FOR BIDS- BA296,300
CPCO2011
ADMINISTRATION
ADVERTISING L
07/20/92
$337.08
SOUTHHAM BUSINESS CO
AD FOR BIDS - CANOPY /RA
CPCO2024
ADMINISTRATION
ADVERTISING L
< *>
$544.84*
128829
07/20/92
$12,820.85
SOUTHSIDE DISTR. CO.
BEER
JUNE /184
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$188.85
SOUTHSIDE DISTR. CO.
MIX
JUNE /184
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$4,575.75
SOUTHSIDE DISTR. CO.
BEER
JUNE /50T
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BE
07/20/92
$110.15
SOUTHSIDE DISTR. CO.
MIX
JUNE /50T
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$17;695.60*
128830
07/20/92
$60.20
SPS
REPAIR PARTS
1890773
BUILDINGS
REPAIR PARTS
2257
07/20/92
$192.35
SPS
REPAIR PARTS
1893882
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
2343
07/20/92
$31.89
SPS
REPAIR PARTS
1895357
BUILDINGS
REPAIR PARTS
2425
07/20/92
$26..40
SPS
REPAIR PARTS
1893883
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2404
07/20/92
$14.91
SPS
REPAIR PARTS
1893884
CITY HALL GENE
REPAIR PARTS
2423
07/20/92
$51.29
SPS
REPAIR PARTS
1895528
BUILDINGS
REPAIR PARTS
2422
07/20/92
$99.53
SPS
REPAIR PARTS
1896468
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2534
07/20/92
$12.75
SPS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1898395
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPL
2609
< *>
$489.32*
128831
07/20/92
$100.00 ."ST
JOSEPH'E HOME FOR
PROFESSIONAL SVC - OT
07292
ADMINISTRATION
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$100.00*
128832
07/20/92
$200.00
ST PAUL URBAN TENNIS
PRO SERVICE 7/11/92
071292
ADMINISTRATION
PRO SVC.OTHER
< *>
$200.00*
128833
07/20/92
$189.76
STAR TRIBUNE
WANT AD
063092
CENT SVC GENER
ADVERT PERSON
< *>
$189.76*
128834
07/20/92
$135.60
STATE SUPPLY COMPANY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
63872
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPL
2605
< *>
$135.60*
128835
07/20/92
$100.00
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIRS
142176
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
07/20/92
$143.24
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
168863
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
07/20/92
$847.16
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
8764
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
2500
07/20/92
$100.00
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIRS
142352
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
07/20/92
$33.07
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
169244
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
07/20/92
$12.68
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR .PARTS
169321
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
< *>
$1,236.15*
128836
07/20/92
$32.76
SUPERAMERICA
GASOLINE
0003654
EQUIPMENT OPER
GASOLINE
< *>
$32.76*
128837
07/20%92
$36.40
SUPERIOR FORD
REPAIR PARTS
152888
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2339
< *>
$36.40*
128838
07/20/92
$477.04
SUSAN FRAME
COST OF COMM
072173
ART SUPPLY GIF
CST OF GD FOO
2815
07/20/92
$144.00
SUSAN FRAME
AC OFFICE ADMINISTRAT
071392
ART CENTER ADM
SALARIES TEMP
< *>
$621.04*
128839
07/20/92
$100.00
SWANSON HAROLD
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 23
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128840
07/20/92
$7.27
SWIFT, LORI
REFUND/ PLAYGROUND /TO
071392
GENERAL FD PRO
REGISTRATION
< *>
$7.27*
128841
07/20/92
$5,037.20
SYSCO MN
COST OF GOOD SOLD
070192
GRILL
CST OF GO F00
1285
07/20/92
$236.87
SYSCO MN
CLEANING SUPPLIES
070192
GRILL
CLEANING SUPP
1285
07/20/92
$371.40
SYSCO MN
GENERAL SUPPLIES
070192
GRILL
GENERAL SUPPL
1285
< *>
$5,645.47*
128842
07/20/92
589.25
TAMARACK MATERIAL
BLDG SUPPLIES
235381
CENTENNIAL LAK
PAINT
267.1
< *>
$89.25"
128843
07/20/92
$127.80
TESSMAN SEED INC
MULCH FOR GREENHOUSE
110536
GENERAL TURF C
PLANT & TREES
2569
< *>
$127.80*
128844
07/20/92
$155.40
THE KANE SERVICE
GUARD SERVICES
4119683
BUILDING & GRO
PROF SERVICES
2895
07/20/92
$77.70
THE KANE SERVICE
PRO SERVICES
4132967
BUILDING & GRO
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$233.10*
128845
07/.20/92
$121.00
THE PRINT SHOP
PRINTING
3518
ADMINISTRATION
PRINTING
07/20/92
$385.00
THE PRINT SHOP
MONTHLY NEWSLETTER
19357
SENIOR CITIZEN
GENERAL SUPPL
2291
< *>
$506.00*
128846
07/20/92
$13,736.87
THOMSEN - NYBECK
PROSECUTING
061592
LEGAL SERVICES
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$13,736.87*
128847
07/20/92
$1,328.50
THOROUGHBRED CARPETS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
13250
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
1908
< *>
$1,328.50*
128848
07/20/92
$408.15
THORPE DISTR.
MIX
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
07/20/92
$20,067.65
THORPE DISTR.
BEER
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BE
< *>
$20,475.80*
128849
07/20/92
$138.14
TOLL COMPANY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
183019
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPL
2320
07/20/92
$163.37
TOLL COMPANY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
183119
BUILDING & GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2462
07/20/92
543.86
TOLL COMPANY
WELDING SUPPLIES
183499
EQUIPMENT OPER
WELDING SUPPL
2491
< *>
$345.37*
128850
07/20/92
$25.00
TONGSON, SHERI
REFUND TENNIS
070992
GENERAL FD PRO
REGISTRATION
< *>
$25.00*
128851
07/20/92
$2,070.00
TONKA WOODWORKS
WINE RACKS
070692
LIQUOR PROG
OFFICE FURN &
2232
< *>
$2,070.00*
128852.07/20/92
$6.50
TRIARCO ARTS & CRAFT
CRAFT SUPPLIES
27879
ART CENTER ADM
CRAFT SUPPLIE
2455
07/20/92
$95.63
TRIARCO ARTS & CRAFT
CRAFT SUPPLIES
30787.
ART CENTER ADM
CRAFT SUPPLIE
2455
< *>
$102.13*
128853
07/20/92
$69.39
TROPHY WORLD
GENERAL SUPPLIES
9215
ADMINISTRATION
GENERAL SUPPL
2839
< *>
$69.39"
128854
07/20/92
$103.57
TWIN CITY FILTER
GENERAL SUPPLIES
20871
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPL
2519
< *>
$103.57*
128855
07/20/92
$11.14
TWIN CITY HARDWARE
REPAIR PARTS
457482
BUILDING MAINT
REPAIR PARTS
2602
< *>
$11.14*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER THU. JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 24
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128856
07/20/92
$85.22
TWIN CITY HOME JUICE
MIX
JUNE /VER
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
r *>
$85.22*
128857
07/20/92
$476.58
TWIN CITY SAW SERVIC
CHAIN SAW REPLACE
3863
EQUIPMENT REPL
EQUIP REPLACE
2847
< *>
$476.58*
128858
07/20/92
,511.66
UNITED ELECTRIC CORP
REPAIR PARTS
18268600
CITY HALL GENE
REPAIR PARTS
2324
07/20/92
$366.19
UNITED ELECTRIC CORP
REPAIR PARTS
18397000
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
2486
07/20/92
$355.50
UNITED ELECTRIC CORP
REPAIR PARTS
18396900
PUMP & .LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
2438
07/20/92
$640.02
UNITED ELECTRIC CORP
REPAIR PARTS
18435200
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2537
07/20/92
$145.58
UNITED ELECTRIC CORP
REPAIR PARTS
18460400
DISTRIBUTION
REPAIR PARTS
2550
07/20/92
$187.68
UNITED ELECTRIC CORP
REPAIR PARTS
18477200
CITY HALL GENE
REPAIR PARTS
2556
< *>
$1,706.63*
128859
07/20/92
$40.00
UNIVERSITY OF ST THO
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
071492
PARK MAINTENAN
CONF & SCHOOL
< *>
$40.00*
128861
07/20/92
$49.14
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
DARE
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$119.05
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
FIRE DEPT. GEN
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$3,671.00
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
CENT SVC GENER
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$162.04
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
ART CENTER BLD
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$149.21
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
SKATING & HOCK
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$16.24
..US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
07 092
BUILDING MAINT
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$502.80
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
CLUB HOUSE
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$58.34
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
MAINT OF COORS
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$113.06
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
POOL OPERATION
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$220.74
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
ARENA BLDG /GRO
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$42.89
US WEST.COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
GUN RANGE
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$84.21
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
PUMP & LIFT ST
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$530.16
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
DISTRIBUTION
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$16.06
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
50TH ST OCCUPA
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$16.06
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
YORK OCCUPANCY
TELEPHONE
07/20/92
$134.93
US WEST COMM.
TELEPHONE
072092
VERNON OCCUPAN
TELEPHONE
< *>
$51885.93*
128862
07/20/92
$84.60
VALLIERE, JOHN
MEETING EXPENSE
071292
ADMINISTRATION
MEETING EXPEN
< *>
$84.60*
128863
07/20/92
$63.01
VAN PAPER CO.
CASH REGISTER TAPES
416001
LIQUOR 50TH ST
PAPER SUPPLIE
07/20/92
$63.01
VAN PAPER CO.
CASH REGISTER TAPES
416001
LIQUOR YORK GE
PAPER SUPPLIE.
07/20/92
$63.02
VAN PAPER CO.
CASH REGISTER TAPES
416001
VERNON LIQUOR
PAPER SUPPLIE
07/20/92
$557.92
VAN PAPER CO.
PAPER BAGS
416418
50TH ST SELLIN
PAPER SUPPLIE
2649
07/20/92
$1,007.05
VAN PAPER CO.
PAPER BAGS
416421
YORK SELLING
PAPER SUPPLIE
2649
07/20/92
$715.75
VAN PAPER CO.
PAPER BAGS
416422_
VERNON SELLING
PAPER SUPPLIE
2649
< *>
$2,469.76*
128864
07/20/92
$485.00
VANTAGE ELECTRIC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
12095:
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
2050
07/20/92
$475.00
VANTAGE ELECTRIC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
12,158
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPL
2890
<*>
$960.00*
128865
07/20/92
$28.12
VAUGHN DISPLAY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
49269
SPECIAL ACTIVI
GENERAL SUPPL
2811
< *>
$28.12*
128866
07/20/92
$136.31
VETERAN ELECTRONICS
EQUIP MAINT
51576
POLICE DEPT. G
EQUIP MAINT
2821
< *>
$136.31*
COUNCIL
CHECK - REGISTER THU, JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM
page 25
CHECK#
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM,
OBJECT
P.O. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128867
07/20/92
550.00
VFW BLOOMINGTON
GENERAL SUPPLIES
070892.
CENTENNIAL'LAK
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$50.00*
-
128868
07/20/92
$415.35
VOSS LIGHTING
REPAIR PARTS
207388_
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
REPAIR PARTS
2402
07/20/92
$230.59
VOSS LIGHTING
REPAIR PARTS
207550
PW BUILDING
REPAIR PARTS
2439
< *>
$645.94*
128869
07/20/92
$469.00
VULCAN INC
BLADE
3032507
STREET NAME SI
PAINT
1014
< *>
$469.00"
128870
07/20/92
$372.75
WALDOR PUMP & EQUIP
REPAIR PARTS
20576
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR PARTS
2641.
< *>
$372.75*
128871
07/20/92
$100.00
WALSH WILLIAM
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
128872
07/20/92
$248.36
WEIGLE, SUE
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE
070692
PARK ADMIN.
MILEAGE
<+�>
$248.36*
128873
07/20/92
$712.50
WENDY ANDERSON ENTER
SERVICES
063092.
ADMINISTRATION
PROF SERVICES
2831
< *>
$712.50*
128874
07/20/92
$90.00
„ WERT, CAPRICE
CLEANING
31566
CLUB HOUSE
PROF SERVICES
2280
07/20/92
$90.00
-WERT, CAPRICE
CLEANING
311569
CLUB HOUSE
PROF SERVICES
2282
< *>
$180.00*
128875
07/20/92
$24.15
WEST WELD SUPPLY CO.
WELDING SUPPLIES
95572
EQUIPMENT OPER
WELDING SUPPL
2487
< *>
$24.15*
128876
07/20/92
$37.50
WINE SPECTATOR
WINE MAG
050792
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MI
< *>
$37.50*
128877
07/20/92
$50.00
WOODSTROM, LINDA
REFUND /TENNIS
070692
GENERAL FD PRO
REGISTRATION
ot>
$50.00*
128878
07/20/92
$272.06
WRIGHT LINE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
157051 -0
INSPECTIONS
GENERAL SUPPL
07/20/92
$306.00
WRIGHT LINE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
155615 -0
INSPECTIONS
GENERAL SUPPL
< *>
$578.06*
128879
07/20/92
$100.00
WROBLESKI -HENRY
POLICE SERVICES
JULY
RESERVE PROGRA
PERS SERVICES
< *>
$100.00*
128880
07/20/92
$741.73
XEROX CORP
MAINTENANCE
03370114
CENT SVC GENER
EQUIP RENTAL
< *>
$741.73*
128881
07/20/92
$40.00
YELLOW TAXI SERVICE
CAB LICENSE FEES
070992
GENERAL FD PRO
TAXICAB LICEN
< *>
$40.00*
128882
07/20/92
$36.00
ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
54260828
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL SUPPL
2912
< *>
$36.00*
128883
07/20/92
$2,982.00
ZIEGLER INC
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
G0958201
GENERAL MAINT
CONTR REPAIRS
2111
07/20/92
$171.42
ZIEGLER INC
REPAIR PARTS
KC79171
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2432
< *>
$3,153.42*
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU. JUL 16, 1992, 9:34 PM page 26
CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. #
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.-------
128884 07/20/92 $50.00 ZISMER, KEVIN DEMO /JAMBO 071192 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER
< ■>
$50.00"
$2,750,649.56"
COUNCIL
CHECK SUMMARY
THU, JUL 16. 1992, 9:46 PM page 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FUND #
10
$1,973,983.29
FUND #
11
$2,531.62.
FUND #
12
$103.17
FUND #
15
$34,066.36
FUND #
23
$4,899.03
FUND #
26
$5,718.06
FUND #
27
$38,149.56
FUND #
28.
$2,505.63
FUND #
29
$1,622.15
.FUND #
30
$17,361.27
FUND #
40
$57,042.70
FUND #
41
$57,824.45
FUND #.
50.
$156,259.24 `
FUND #
60.
$616.50
FUND #
66.
$397,966.53
$2,750,649.56"