The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1996-01-02_COUNCIL PACKETAGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 2, 1996 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA - Adoption of the Consent Agenda is made by the Commissioners as to HRA items and by the Council Members as to 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 of the Agenda. * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of HRA Meeting of December 19, 1995. II. PAYMENT OF HRA CLAIMS as per pre -list dated 12/28/95 Total $16,364.01. Rollcall required. III. ADJOURNMENT - _ EDINA CITY COUNCIL * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of December 19, 1995 and Year End Meeting of December 28, 1995. II. ORDINANCES - First Reading: Requires offering of Ordiancne only. Second Reading: Favorable rollcall of majority of all members of Council to pass. A. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1995-11. An Ordinance creating new Code Section 740 requiring licensing and annual inspections of underground parking garages of multiple residential buildings. III. AWARD OF BIDS • A. Ameridata, purchase of computer hardware for Engineering Department. is Agenda/Edina City Council January 2,1996 Page Two IV. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS F.3 • B. • C. • D. • E. • F. • G. H. I. Park Referenda and Senior Citizen Center. Designation of Director /Alternate Director of Suburban Rate Authority Designation of Director /Alternate Director of LOGIS. Designation of Official Newspaper. Signatory Resolution. Facsimile Signature Resolution. Official Depositories Resolution. Official Depositories Resolution - National City Bank. Special Assessment Deferment Policy. V. CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS VI. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES VII. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL VIII: MANAGERS MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS IX. FINANCE A. Resolution calling for sale of General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Financing Refunding Bonds, Series 1996A. B. Payment of Claims as per pre-list dated 1228/95 TOTAL: $33,578.74 Rollcall required. Tues Jan 2 Regular Council Meeting 7 :00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Jan 15 MARTIN LUTHER KING HOLIDAY - CITY HALL CLOSED Tues Jan 16 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Feb 5 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Feb 19 PRESIDENTS DAY HOLIDAY - CITY HALL CLOSED Tues Feb 20 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Mar 4 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Mar 18 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS I NAMRON COMPANY LLC 401 Groveland Avenue • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 • (612) 874 -1102 • FAX (612) 874 -1054 January 2, 1996 Honorable Mayor of Edina Edina City Council 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 1995 -13 Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: The purpose of this letter is to respectfully request that you do not adopt proposed Ordinance No. 1995 -13. We own and manage the rental apartment properties known as Vernon Oaks Apartments, 5400 Vernon Avenue, and The Lincoln Apartments, 5200 and 5241 Lincoln Drive. These apartment communities. have three buildings with parking garages that would be affected by the proposed ordinance. We urge rejection of the proposed ordinance for the following reasons: 1. The proposed ordinance fails to address a compelling public purpose. What is the problem the ordinance is designed to correct? 2. It is our understanding that Mr. Velde cites 5 instances of carbon monoxide ( "CO ") incidents in the past two years arising from parking garages adjacent to housing. Fairview Southdale hospital reports 29 CO incidents in the past year. Our conversation with the Edina Fire Department indicated that their CO poisoning calls were primarily to single family residences with defective furnaces. Assuming Mr. Velde's goal is to address CO poisoning for all citizens of Edina, what is his plan to inspect and monitor the home furnaces. Edina has a large stock of homes that are 20+ years of age with old furnaces. If CO poisoning control is the true goal, a comprehensive CO monitoring program is appropriate. Including only multi - family units in a CO monitoring program is unfair and discriminatory. 7 ; Honorable Mayor of Edina Edina City Council January 2, 1996 Page 2 3. For the 5 incidents that did occur, where did they occur? If a small number of multi - family garages are believed to be "problem" properties, it is not appropriate to require 95% of the remaining properties to pay for the sins of a few. Offenders should pay. 4. Last year, Mr. Velde proposed an apartment building inspection program budgeted at $70,000. Mayor Richards deleted that budget request. This licensing program will raise $11,100 and more. This ordinance looks like a back door way of raising additional revenues for Mr. Velde's department. I would ask him what other revenue raising proposals he has in mind. 5. The funding of this ordinance is unfair. By law, rental apartment residents pay taxes to the City of Edina at a rate 340% of the rate paid by owner occupied housing. The city should look at this already generous revenue stream to fund CO monitoring for rental apartment residents. 6. We try very hard to make a living through our ownership of rental apartments. We have every incentive to maintain our properties in top condition. We are required by existing laws and regulations to keep our properties in safer and better condition than single family homes. Failure to do so could result in lawsuits that could put us out of business and financially destroy US. This ordinance is unnecessary and represents additional government regulation where none is appropriate. For these reasons and more, please reject this ordinance. We offer an alternative. The City Council could appoint a committee of voluteers to study the CO issue. In addition to Mr. Velde, the committee should consist of a rental housing representative, an owner occupied housing representative, one or more industry specialists, a representative of the Mayor /City Council and a homeowner representative. I or a member of our company would be pleased to participate. b95de867 -2- Honorable Mayor of Edina Edina City Council January 2, 1996 Page 3 The committee would first understand the problem. Next, it could identify options available. For example, we are already required to annually test our fire alarm systems. As such, an annual CO test could be made a part of that test. Further, there are a number of mechanical system solutions that could be included in the problem solving menu. A public /private joint effort will work. Reject the ordinance. Establish the CO Monitoring Committee of the City Council. Request a report with recommendations in 120 days. Thank you. NPB/ b95de867 -3- Very truly yours, 'Y'4,0� � . Norman P. Bjornnes, Jr. Managing Owner MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 19, 1995 A joint meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City Council was convened to consider concurrently: 1) Grandview Area Planning Study by the Hoisington, Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGi), 2) Preliminary Plat for Kunz/Lewis Addition (5200 Eden Circle and 5220 Eden Avenue), 3) Preliminary Rezoning - PID Planned Industrial District to POD -1 Planned Office District (5229 Eden Avenue), Laurent/Park Development, Office Park Redevelopment and 4) Final Development Plan for Kunz Parts Plus Warehouse ( 5200 Eden Circle). Action was taken by the HRA and Council as recorded. ROLL CALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners /Members Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith and Richards. JOINT HRA/COUNCIL GRANDVIEW AREA PLANNING STUDY PRESENTED: PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD: PRELIMINARY PLAT KUNZ/LEWIS ADDITION. 5200 EDEN CIRCLE AND 5220 EDEN AVENUE• PRELIMINARY REZONING - PID. PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO POD -1 - PLANNED OFFICE DISTRICT: AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, KUNZ PARTS PLUS WAREHOUSE 5200 EDEN CIRCLE: VARIOUS PLANNING MATTERS CONTINUED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Following due notice given, a public hearing was conducted. Director Hughes reminded the HRA and Council that the subject property is generally located south of Eden Avenue and west of the railroad tracks. After the October 16, 1995, meeting, staff retained a planning consultant to review plans for the Lewis /Kunz Oil property. On December 4, 1995, Michael Schroeder, Vice President of Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. (HKGi), and Chief Designer of the project, presented concept plans for the area. Director Hughes explained that Fred Hoisington, of HKGi was present tonight to present more detailed plans. Director Hughes noted that after the HRA reviewed the HKGi plans, the Council will consider proposals for the private redevelopment of a portion of the area including: 1) the replat of the Kunz Oil /Lewis Engineering properties; 2) the redevelopment of the Lewis Engineering property with offices; and; 3) the renovation and expansion of the Kunz Oil warehouse. Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan Director Hughes briefed the HRA/Council concerning the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan which was adopted in 1984. The Plan was preceded by the Grandview Area Traffic Study which was incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan. Since its adoption, several elements of the public portion of the Plan have been completed: • Link Road Reconstruction and Signalization • Closure of Vernon Eden/Sherwood Intersection • Consolidate Jerry's /Norwest Bank/Union Oil Access • Vacate Summit Avenue • Demolish Public Works Garage and Reconstruct Public Parking Ramp /Public Works Facility • Grandview Area Streetscape Project Additionally, several private redevelopments have occurred: • SuperAmerica Reconstruction • Jerry's Shopping Center and Office Expansion • Vernon Terrace Apartments • Summit Place Apartment • Washburn McReavy Renovation • Grandview Tire Redevelopment • Biltmore Bowl Redevelopment Director Hughes explained the Redevelopment Plan identified the area south of Eden Avenue as characterized by "non-conforming uses, obsolete buildings and incompatible land uses." Goals promoted by the Redevelopment Plan included "to undertake land acquisition, parcel assembly and parcel disposition necessary to eliminate certain substandard and non- conforming uses and buildings, to assemble logical, conforming and more efficient building sites." The Plan also noted that public acquisition of property would be kept to a minimum, but in some cases public acquisition may be necessary. Policies Concerning Tax Increment Financing (T.I.F. Director Hughes explained that the City and HRA have been involved as a public partner in several T.I.F. programs in addition to the Grandview Area. Although no formal written policies concerning T.I.F. have been adopted, limits have been placed on the use of T.I.F. to: 1) Providing a public asset such as a park, parking ramp or public amenities; 2) Providing affordable housing; and 3) Acquiring properties which are unsafe- or grossly inappropriate for their surroundings. Alternatives for Study Area Director Hughes explained that after reviewing the study area in light of our T.I.F. policies, neither a public asset would be provided nor an unsafe or grossly inappropriate land use would be eliminated by virtue of the public assuming an aggressive role in this redevelopment. However, he noted the City could further the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the Grandview Redevelopment Plan by pursuing the redevelopment of these properties for housing. Upon this basis, HKGi has been directed to refine two illustrative development plans for the study area. The first plan illustrates the private redevelopment proposed by Kunz/Parts Plus and Laurent/Park Development. The modified plans by HKGi reflect their recommendations as to access and building arrangement. The last illustrative plan depicts a variation of the Laurent/Park plan for the Lewis Engineering property and a portion of the Kunz Oil property with the balance of the Kunz Oil property as well as other properties south of Eden Avenue redeveloped for attached housing. The housing plan furthers the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and Redevelopment Plan and provides better separation of commercial and residential traffic. Significant public involvement would be necessary in the form of financial assistance for the housing component and acquisition of private property (in some cases this may require condemnation). Approximately $3 +million of T.I.F. assistance may be required to complete the housing alternative. Required Actions Director Hughes explained that the Council must take certain actions at the December 19 meeting due to requirements of State law which concern the Preliminary Plat for the Kunz/Lewis Addition and the Final Development Plan for Kunz Parts Plus. The Council may decide to continue the Laurent/Park Rezoning for an additional 60+ days if it so desires. As to the Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan, Director Hughes explained the City Council must either 1) approve or deny the plat, 2) approve or deny the final development plan or 3) receive consent from the parties at interest to continue the matter to a future date. Alternatives If recommendations of HKGi are pursued with respect to the private plans of Laurent/Park and Kunz Parts Plus, Director Hughes suggested a continuance should be considered until January_ 16, 1996, allowing the developers opportunity to respond to revisions of the plans. Staff would recommend denial of the plat and final development plan if a continuance were not approved. Director Hughes explained that if Council were to pursue the housing plan, staff would recommend denial of the plat and final development plan. Council should then direct staff to prepare financial analyses and a feasibility report concerning such a project. Public Comments Chairman /Mayor Richards opened the hearing for public comments. John Menke, 5301 Pinewood Trail, representing the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Association, stated the private redevelopment plan has been reviewed by the neighborhood association in several versions. They have some concerns regarding traffic and height, but the basic proposal is livable to the Association. The housing plan is another matter. Mr. Menke expressed concern that the number of living units more than doubled, that the neighborhood association has not had the opportunity to review the housing alternative and would need more time than 30 days to review. He thought the neighborhood association could support the private development plan, but would like to see a cul de sac at Eden Circle instead of a through street. Chris Moran, Laurent Parks Development Team, stated Monday was his first opportunity to review the Hoisington plan. This is about the ninth different plan seen for the site. Mr. Moran agrees with almost every plan seen so far. Their team is more than happy to work with the City and neighborhood to develop a mutually agreeable plan. Their only problem with the revised private development plan is that the City would be taking land away and Laurent could not meet parking requirements. Ted Giannobile, 5244 Eden Circle, TSE office building south of the Kunz/Lewis site expressed concern regarding parking with any of the proposed alternatives. He asked that the developers and Council consider their parking needs. If the housing plan is pursued what is to become of TSE's building. Walter Kunz, 5200 Eden Circle, stated that where the Laurent people generally approved of all the plan variations, this last variation offers him some concern. The partial removal of the Kunz building is an issue because of the way the building was constructed. Mr. Kunz could remodel their building as previously proposed and still have exterior walls existing, however, moving the walls back twenty feet requires replacing the entire north face of the building. Mr. Kunz also questioned the loading dock design with semi's backing in at an angle. Sealing off Eden Avenue is a concern because this would require semis to make loops within parking lot. Mr. Kunz indicated his desire to participate in discussions regarding the revised development proposal, but felt the necessity of stating his concerns. .'A Commission /Council Comments Chairman/Mayor Richards asked Mr. Hoisington for clarification of whether or not a cul de sac would work if the private development plan is pursued, where the proposed cul de sac would be located, and if the housing plan were pursued would condemnation by the City be necessary? Mr. Hoisington replied that three scenarios are possible for street access in this area: 1) a total cul de sac; 2) providing some access to the TAGs building off the cul de sac; or, 3) keeping Eden Avenue as a through street. Further, Mr. Hoisington stated the housing plan would use the Lewis and Tags sites. Commissioner/Member Maetzold asked for more information regarding the public participation if the housing plan were chosen. Director Hughes responded that the housing plan at the proposed density would not support the current land value of the properties and that public participation would be twofold. First, using the City's or HRA's power of eminent domain, if necessary, the properties would be acquired. Secondly, the land cost would probably need to be written down through a tax increment financing process to make the land affordable for residential use. A very preliminary review of the land shows the value at approximately $25,000 - $30,000 per residential unit, but to be offered as "affordable housing" the value needs to be approximately $7,000 per residential unit. Commissioner /Member Smith expressed his opinion that this is not the time or place for the City to invest taxpayers' funds in the residential plan. The burden of providing "affordable housing" falls too heavily on the taxpayers, therefore he recommended focussing on the private redevelopment with the current owners working with both the neighborhood association and the planning consultant to achieve a workable plan. Commissioner/Member Kelly stated that while she is committed to providing more lower income housing she agrees with Commissioner /Member Smith's rationale supporting the private redevelopment plan instead of the housing plan. Commissioner /Member Kelly asked Fire Chief Paulfranz about the safety issue if a cul de sac is developed at Eden Circle. Chief Paulfranz replied that the department always favors multiple accesses, however, he indicated he had not reviewed the proposed cul de sac design. Chief Paulfranz indicated that in other similar circumstances safety concerns have been satisfied with proper street sizing . and alignment. Commissioner /Member Maetzold indicated his preference for the housing plan which he felt upheld the spirit of the Grandview Redevelopment Plan developed in 1984. Commissioner /Member Maetzold favored the combination of office and housing over the office /warehouse development because it offers good transition to the existing residential neighborhood. The housing plan also offers an opportunity to further our livable communities housing goals. Commissioner /Member Paulus commented that this site is very difficult to work with since developers are unable to work with raw land. Commissioner /Member Paulus advised any .redevelopment will not be perfect due to the prohibitively high land cost and the road encumbrance on the site, therefore she indicated her preference for the private development plan. Chairman /Mayor Richards reiterated his support of the private development plan over the housing plan for all of the previously stated reasons also observing that the Council has a number of times turned down residential plans for the ' property south of Eden. Chairman/Mayor Richards added it makes sense to utilize the land similarly to what currently exists with modifications to the zoning from Industrial to and Office on the north portion of the southerly site. Chairman/Mayor Richards commented that many issues need to be addressed as indicated by Mr. Hoisington's report. He expressed hope that the developer would be sensitive to all the issues in view of the magnitude of the rezoning request. Chairman/Mayor Richards concluded Council consensus appears to focus on the private plan for the Kunz/Lewis property Chairman/Mayor Richards asked Mr. Kunz whether he would consent to continuing action on his final development plan proposal and the preliminary plat of the Kunz/Lewis Property until January 16, 1996. Mr. Kunz stated that he understands that the Council is focusing on the private development plan for the property. In light of this focus then Mr. Kunz agreed to extending the date for action until January 16, 1996. Chairman /Mayor Richards asked Mr. Moran if he agreed with the direction Council is taking regarding the property understanding that Council will act at its January 16, 1996 meeting. Mr. Moran replied that Gordon Lewis is technically still the owner of the property, however, Mr. Moran had been given authority by Mr. Lewis to agree to continuing action until January 16, 1996. Mr. Kunz stated he also had a letter from Gordon Lewis extending Council's time for action fifteen days. Mr. Kunz said when he arrived at the Council meeting and saw the January 16, 1996 date for action he phoned Mr. Lewis who gave him verbal authority to use his best judgement regarding the continuance. Mr. Kunz indicated his acceptance of the January 16, 1996 action date. Member Maetzold moved to continue until January 16, 1996 action on the Preliminary Plat request of the Kunz/Lewis property, 5200 Eden Circle and 5220 Eden Avenue and the Final Development Plan, Kunz Park Plus Warehouse, 5200 Eden Circle as consented to by Mr. Walter Kunz and Mr. Gordon Lewis. Ted Giannobile asked that he be included in redevelopment discussions relative to his parking issues. Chairman/Mayor Richards replied. that Mr. Giannobile's parking issue is a private matter and not one that the City can be involved in. Member Kelly seconded the motion Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion carried. Member Kelly moved to continue until January 16, 1996 action on the Preliminary Rezoning Request from planned Industrial District -PID to Planned Office District, POD -1, 5220 Eden Avenue. Member Smith seconded the motion Member Smith asked Attorney Gilligan if any extension was necessary on the rezoning request. Attorney Gilligan stated that the rezoning request did not need an extension. Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion carried. i CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Motion was made by Commissioner Smith and was seconded by Commissioner Kelly to adopt the Consent Agenda as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion carried. "MINUTES OF THE HRA MEETING OF DECEMBER 4, 1995, APPROVED Motion was made by Commissioner Smith and was seconded by Commissioner Kelly to approve the HRA Minutes of December 4, 1995. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. CLAIMS PAID Commissioner Smith made a motion to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December, 13, 1995, and consisting of one page totaling $244,300.64. Commissioner Kelly seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion carried. There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, Chairman Richards declared the meeting adjourned. Executive Director COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, DEC 28, 1995, 7:09 PM page l CHECK NO DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT PO NUM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 12818 01/02/96 $24.79 AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES TELEPHONE 122095 GRANDVIEW MISC < *> $24.79* 12819 01/02/96 $1,520.05 DORSEY & WHITNEY LEGAL FEES 467284 CENTENNIAL LAK PRO FEES LEG /S < *> $1,520.05* 12820 01/02/96 $14,166.67 PARTNERS FOR SENIOR COMM HRA BOND PAYMENT 0195 EDINBOROUGH LOAN TO OTH FU < *> $14,166.67* 12821 01/02/96 $652.50 SANDERS WACKER WEHRMAN B ARCH FEES 95120614 GRANDVIEW PRO FEE ARCH /E < *> $652.50* $16,364.01* MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 19, 1995 A joint meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City Council was convened to consider concurrently: 1) Grandview Area Planning Study by the Hoisington, Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGi), 2) Preliminary Plat for Kunz/Lewis Addition (5200 Eden Circle and 5220 Eden Avenue), 3) Preliminary Rezoning - PID Planned Industrial District to POD-1 Planned Office District (5229 Eden Avenue), Laurent/Park Development, Office Park Redevelopment and 4) Final Development Plan for Kunz Parts Plus Warehouse ( 5200 Eden Circle). Action was taken by the HRA and Council as recorded. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners/Members Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith and Richards. JOINT HRA/COUNCIL GRANDVIEW AREA PLANNING STUDY PRESENTED: PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD: PRELIMINARY PLAT KUNZILEWIS ADDITION, 5200 EDEN CIRCLE AND 5220 EDEN AVENUE: PRELIMINARY REZONING - PID, PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO POD-1 - PLANNED OFFICE DISTRICT: AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, KUNZ PARTS PLUS WAREHOUSE, 5200 EDEN CIRCLE: VARIOUS PLANNING MATTERS CONTINUED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Following due notice given, a public hearing was conducted. Assistant Manager Hughes reminded the HRA and Council that the subject property is generally located south of Eden Avenue and west of the railroad tracks. After the October 16, 1995, meeting, staff retained a planning consultant to review plans for the Lewis /Kunz Oil property. On December 4, 1995, Michael Schroeder, Vice President of Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. (HKGi), and Chief Designer of the project, presented concept plans for the area. Assistant Manager Hughes explained that Fred Hoisington, of HKGi was present tonight to present more detailed plans. Assistant Manager Hughes noted that after the HRA reviewed the HKGi plans, the Council will consider proposals for the private redevelopment of a portion of the area including: 1) the replat of the Kunz Oil /Lewis Engineering properties; 2) the redevelopment of the Lewis Engineering property with offices; and; 3) the renovation and expansion of the Kunz Oil warehouse. Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan Assistant Manager Hughes briefed the HRA/Council concerning the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan which was adopted in 1984. The Plan was preceded by the Grandview Area Traffic Study which was incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan. Since its adoption, several elements of the public portion of the Plan have been completed: • Link Road Reconstruction and Signalization • Closure of Vernon Eden /Sherwood Intersection • Consolidate Jerry's /Norwest Bank/Union Oil Access • Vacate Summit Avenue • Demolish Public Works Garage and Reconstruct Public Parking Ramp /Public Works Facility • Grandview Area Streetscape Project Additionally, several private redevelopments have occurred: • SuperAmerica Reconstruction • Jerry's Shopping Center and Office Expansion • Vernon Terrace Apartments G Summit Place Apartment • Washburn McReavy Renovation • Grandview Tire Redevelopment • Biltmore Bowl Redevelopment Assistant Manager Hughes explained the Redevelopment Plan identified ,the area south of Eden Avenue as characterized by "non - conforming uses, obsolete buildings and incompatible land uses." Goals promoted by the Redevelopment Plan included "to undertake land acquisition, parcel assembly and parcel disposition necessary to eliminate certain substandard and non - conforming uses and buildings, to assemble logical, conforming and more efficient building sites." The Plan also noted that public acquisition of property would be kept to a minimum, but in some cases public acquisition may be necessary. Policies Concerning Tax Increment Financing (T.I.F.) Assistant Manager Hughes explained that the City and HRA have been involved as a public partner in several T.I.F. programs in addition to the Grandview Area. Although no formal written policies concerning T.I.F. have been adopted, limits have been placed on the use of T.I.F. to: 1) Providing a public asset such as a park, parking ramp or public amenities; 2) Providing affordable housing; and 3) Acquiring properties which are unsafe or grossly inappropriate for their surroundings. Alternatives for Study Area Assistant Manager Hughes explained that after reviewing the study area in light of our T.I.F. policies, neither a public asset would be provided nor an unsafe or grossly inappropriate land use would be eliminated by virtue of the public assuming an aggressive role in this redevelopment. However, he noted the City could further the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the Grandview Redevelopment Plan by pursuing the redevelopment of these properties for housing. Upon this basis, HKGi has been directed to refine two illustrative development plans for the study area. The first plan illustrates the private redevelopment proposed by Kunz/Parts Plus and Laurent/Park Development. The modified plans by HKGi reflect their recommendations as to access and building arrangement. The last illustrative plan depicts a variation of the Laurent/Park plan for the Lewis Engineering property and a portion of the Kunz Oil property with the balance of the Kunz Oil property as well as other properties south of Eden Avenue redeveloped for attached housing. The housing plan furthers the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and Redevelopment Plan and provides better separation of commercial and residential traffic. Significant public involvement would be necessary in the forth of financial assistance for the housing component and acquisition of 'private property (in some cases this may require condemnation). Approximately $3 +million of T.I.F. assistance may be required to complete the housing alternative. Required Actions Assistant Manager Hughes explained that the Council must take certain actions at the December 19 meeting due to requirements of State law which concern the Preliminary Plat for the Kunz/Lewis Addition and the Final Development Plan for Kunz Parts Plus. The Council may decide to continue the Laurent/Park Rezoning for an additional 60+ days if it so desires. As to the Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan, Assistant Manager Hughes explained the City Council must either 1) approve or deny the plat, 2) approve or deny the final development plan or 3) receive consent from the parties at interest to continue the matter to a future date. Alternatives If recommendations of HKGi are pursued with respect to the private plans of Laurent/Park and Kunz Parts Plus, Assistant Manager Hughes suggested a continuance should be considered until January 16, 1996, allowing the developers opportunity to respond to revisions of the plans. Staff would recommend denial of the plat and final development plan if a continuance were not approved. Assistant Manager Hughes explained that if Council were to pursue the housing plan, staff would recommend denial of the plat and final development plan. Council should then direct staff to prepare financial analyses and a feasibility report concerning such a project. Public Comments Chairman/Mayor Richards opened the hearing for public comments. John Menke, 5301 Pinewood Trail, representing the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Association, stated the private redevelopment plan has been reviewed by the neighborhood association in several versions. They have some concerns regarding traffic and height, but the basic proposal is livable to the Association. The housing plan is another matter. Mr. Menke expressed concern that the number of living units more than doubled, that the neighborhood association has not had the opportunity to review the housing alternative and would need more time than 30 days to review. He thought the neighborhood association could support the private development plan, but would like to see a cul de sac at Eden Circle instead of a through street. Chris Moran, Laurent Parks Development Team, stated Monday was his first opportunity to review the Hoisington plan. This is about the ninth different plan seen for the site. M�. Moran agrees with almost every plan seen so far. Their team is more than happy to work with the City and neighborhood to develop a mutually agreeable plan. Their only problem with the revised private development plan is that the City would be taking land away and Laurent could not meet parking requirements. Ted Giannobile, 5244 Eden Circle, TSE office building south of the Kunz/Lewis site expressed concern regarding parking with any of the proposed altematives. He asked that the developers and Council consider their parking needs. If the housing plan is pursued what is to become of TSE's building. Walter Kunz, 5200 Eden Circle, stated that where the Laurent people generally approved of all the plan variations, this last variation offers him some concern. The partial removal of the Kunz building is an issue because of the way the building was constructed. Mr. Kunz could remodel their building as previously proposed and still have exterior walls existing, however, moving the walls back twenty feet requires replacing the entire north face of the building. Mr. Kunz also questioned the loading dock design with semi's backing in at an angle. Sealing off Eden Avenue is a concern because this would require semis to make loops within parking lot. Mr. Kunz indicated his desire to participate in discussions regarding the revised development proposal, but felt the necessity of stating his concerns. Council Comments Chairman/Mayor Richards asked Mr. Hoisington for clarification of whether or not a cul de sac would work if the private development plan is pursued, where the proposed cul de sac would be located, and if the housing plan were pursued would condemnation by the City be necessary? Mr. Hoisington replied that three scenarios are possible for street access. in this area: 1) a total cul de sac; 2) providing some access to the TAGs building off the cul de sac; or 3) keeping Eden Avenue as a through street. Further, Mr. Hoisington stated the housing plan would use the Lewis and Tags sites. Commissioner /Member Maetzold asked for more information regarding the public participation if the housing plan were chosen. Assistant Manager Hughes responded that the housing plan at the proposed density would not support the current land value of the properties and that public participation would be twofold. First, using the City's or HRA's power of eminent domain, if necessary, the properties would be acquired. Secondly, the land cost would probably need to be written down through a tax increment financing process to make the land affordable for residential use. A very preliminary review of the land shows the value at approximately $25,000 - $30,000 per residential unit, but to be offered as "affordable housing" the value needs to be approximately $7,000 per residential unit. Commissioner /Member Smith expressed his opinion that this is not the time or place for the City to invest taxpayers' funds in the residential plan. The burden of providing "affordable housing" falls too heavily on the taxpayers, therefore he recommended focussing on the private redevelopment with the current owners working with both the neighborhood association and the. planning consultant to achieve a workable plan. Commissioner /Member Kelly stated that while she is committed to providing more lower income housing she agrees with Commissioner /Member Smith's rationale supporting the private redevelopment plan instead of the housing plan. Commissioner /Member Kelly asked Fire Chief Paulfranz about the safety issue if a cul de sac is developed at Eden Circle. Chief Paulfranz replied that the department always favors multiple accesses, however, he indicated he had not reviewed the proposed cul de sac design. Chief Paulfranz indicated that in other similar circumstances safety concerns have been satisfied with proper street sizing and alignment. Commissioner /Member Maetzold indicated his preference for the housing plan which he felt upheld the spirit of the Grandview Redevelopment Plan developed in 1984. Commissioner /Member Maetzold favored the combination of office and housing over the office/warehouse development because it offers good transition to the existing residential neighborhood. The housing plan also offers an opportunity to further our livable communities housing goals. Commissioner /Member Paulus commented that this site is very difficult to work with since developers are unable to work with raw land. Commissioner /Member Paulus advised any redevelopment will not be perfect due to the prohibitively high land cost and the road encumbrance on the site, therefore she indicated her preference for the private development plan. Chairtnan/Mayor Richards reiterated his support of the private development plan over the housing plan for all of the previously stated reasons also observing that the Council has a number of times turned down residential plans for, the property south of Eden. Chairman/Mayor Richards added it makes sense to utilize the land similarly to what currently exists with modifications to the zoning from Industrial to and Office on the north portion of the southerly site. Chairman/Mayor Richards commented that many issues need to be addressed as indicated by Mr. Hoisington's report. He expressed hope that the developer would be sensitive to all the issues in view of the magnitude of the rezoning request. Chairman /Mayor Richards concluded Council consensus appears to focus on the private plan for the Kunz/Lewis property Chairman /Mayor Richards asked Mr. Kunz whether he would consent to continuing action on his final development plan proposal and the preliminary plat of the Kunz/Lewis Property until January 16, 1996. Mr. Kunz stated that he understands that the Council is focusing on the private development plan for the property. In light of this focus then Mr. Kunz agreed to extending the date for action until January 16, 1996. Chairman /Mayor Richards asked Mr. Moran if he agreed with the direction Council is taking regarding the property understanding that Council will act at its January 16, 1996 meeting. Mr. Moran replied that Gordon Lewis is technically still the owner of the property, however, Mr. Moran had been given authority by Mr. Lewis to agree to continuing action until January 16, 1996. Mr. Kunz stated he also had a letter from Gordon Lewis extending Council's time for action fifteen days. Mr. Kunz said when he arrived at the Council meeting and saw the January 16, 1996 date for action he phoned Mr. Lewis who gave him verbal authority to use his best judgement regarding the continuance. Mr. Kunz indicated his acceptance of the January 16, 1996 action date. Member Maetzold moved to continue until January 16, 1996 action on the Preliminary Plat request of the Kunz/Lewis property, 5200 Eden Circle and 5220 Eden Avenue and the Final Development Plan, Kunz Park Plus Warehouse, 5200 Eden Circle as consented to by Mr. Walter Kunz and Mr. Gordon Lewis. Ted Giannobile asked that he be included in redevelopment discussions relative to his parking issues. Chairman /Mayor Richards replied that Mr. Giannobile's parking issue is a private matter and not one that the City can be involved in. Member Kelly seconded the motion Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion carried. Member Kelly moved to continue until January 16, 1996 action on the Preliminary Rezoning Request from planned Industrial District -PID to Planned Office District, POD-1, 5220 Eden Avenue. Member Smith seconded the motion Member Smith asked Attorney Gilligan if any extension was necessary on the rezoning request. Attorney Gilligan stated that the rezoning request did not need an extension. Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Kelly to adopt the Council Consent Agenda as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion carried. "MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 4. 1995. APPROVED Motion made by Member Smith, seconded by Member Kelly to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 4, 1995. Motion carried on a rollcall vote - five ayes. APPEAL OF VARIANCE DENIAL - NICK & ATHENA KAROS, 15 CIRCLE WEST. Presentation by Associate Planner Associate Planner Kris Aaker informed the Council the subject property, 15 Circle West is located on the west side of the street. The owners Nick and Athena Karos are proposing constructing a new two story home after removing the existing two story home from the site: The new home would be constructed in roughly the same location as the existing house, however the new house will create a slightly larger building foot print. The position of the new house was proposed to preserve existing rear yard landscaping including, a waterfall fountain and existing bonsai trees. The proposed plan includes a partially enclosed two story front entrance area encroaching six feet into the established frontyard setback. Frontyard setbacks along the block vary between 21 feet to in excess of 100 feet. Associate Planner Aaker stated the house's footprint conforms to all other zoning ordinance requirements in terms of side and rear yard setback, lot coverage and building height. On December 7, 1995 the Zoning Board of Appeals heard and denied the property owners request for a variance. The property owners Nick and Athena Karos then appealed the decision to the City Council. Proponent Comment Dean Dovolis, Dovolis, Johnson & Ruggied, Inc., architect for the Karos elaborated upon the location of an existing grotto stream and bonsai trees which were part of the original construction in approximately 1940. He stated that although this property has been neglected the Karos desire to preserve the landscaping, however, because of standing vacant for over two years the house was not economically feasible for repair. Mr. Dovolis stated the new house was designed to fit in with the neighborhood, however, the front entrance which is open air be would project over the setback line. Nick Karos, owner of 15 Circle West, presented to the City Council additional diagrams of the subject property and pictures of the existing house and garden staked to show the location of the proposed new house related to the existing rearyard landscaping. In addition, Mr. Karos presented a memorandum from Mr. Bob Rinek of 6 Circle West supporting the variance, a letter written by Mr. Karos, reporting his discussion with Mrs. Read, 9 Circle West, a memorandum from Charles Blomquist regarding the position of the proposed new house in relationship to the existing rear landscaping, and a portion of a market evaluation of the property. Mr. Karos stated that the new house as planned would be eight feet from the existing bonsai trees and that moving the house back six feet would only allow two feet of clearance between the house and garden. Mr. Karos pointed out that a house on Coopers Circle was granted a front yard setback variance. He also addressed concerns expressed by Kent Banks and Tony Navarro in letters both dated December 19, 1995. Mr. Karos voiced concern that since his variance request opened up his house plans to the City and he feels it has turned into a detiate'about the size of the house rather than just the six foot variance. He urged that attention be focused on the setback variance not other issues. Member Kelly stated she lives at 2 Circle West which is outside the 200 foot area notified by the City for variance proceedings. Member Kelly was made aware of the variance request by neighbors and had considered not entering into the discussion because of her closeness. However, Member Kelly continued that she does not reside in the Hilldale area, her home is in Meadowbrook Oaks, therefore she intends to participate in the discussion and does not see a conflict. Member Kelly attended the Board of Appeals to view the process. Public Comment Mayor Richards opened the hearing for public comment. Tony Navarro, 17 Circle West, a twenty -five year Edina resident, who has lived at his present address about eight years said he felt these were unfortunate circumstances to meet a new neighbor. Mr. Navarro stated that the six feet the entrance would encroach into the setback area creating an image factor. If the house were moved back six feet Mr. Navarro believed that the repositioning would make the house less demonstrative. He stated the larger homes built in the area have had deep setbacks and while the proposed home is beautiful it is not conducive to the homes on the rest of the street. If that is not the discussion he still wants his opinion expressed. Kent Bank, 7 Circle East, reiterated Mr. Navarro's concern for new neighbor, and stated that he authored his letter for himself and three neighbors. Mr. Bank feels that Mr. Karos comments regarding the backyard were not significantly different from his letter. Mr. Bank's real concern is the aesthetics and this house will protrude towards the street. He and his neighbors intent is to minimize the impact of the proposed house. Athena Karos, owner 15 Circle West, expressed concern about the variance and their efforts to preserve the rear landscaping. Unfortunately they have been used as a platform to express concerns about what is happening in the neighborhood. Their Intent was not to build a monstrosity. According to City Planning Staff they thought the variance request was not out of the ordinary so Mrs. Karos felt caught off guard with the denial. Mrs. Karos requested that they be allowed to add the six foot open air balcony as proposed on their house plans. Nick Karos stated that he realizes many of the residents expressing concern are long time residents. Mr. Karos noted. his family is trying to build a home they can live in for fifty years and urged approval of the variance as requested. Council Comment Member Kelly asked Associate Planner Aaker whether or not the Cooper Circle variance had to do with a hardship because of proximity to the water. Associate Planner Aaker responded that the Cooper Circle variance was for a home at the end of the street. It was for a front overhang with posts similar to the Karos request, however, the Cooper Circle house was not a two story post, pillar and overhang. Associate Planner Aaker stated she could not recollect the degree of the variance. Mayor Richards stated that the home is not the issue, aesthetics will not be reviewed. Mayor Richards explained that the Council spent over one and a half years studying massing and could not arrive at a consensus among the various bodies reviewing the issue. Mayor Richards stated it is not the City's position to talk about aesthetics. Variance request reviews need to be based on the physical characteristics of the site. Specifically, this lot is approximately 350 feet deep, with the proposed house located on the front third of the lot. An approximate 40 foot differential exists from'one end of the lot to the other. There is a reason to preserve the physical characteristics in existence on the lot. Mayor Richards indicated his support of the variance based only upon the physical characteristics of the lot. Member Smith agreed that Council should not review aesthetics or massing. However, Member Smith does not see sufficient reason to grant the six foot front yard variance relative to the design in this case. Member Paulus expressed her intent to support the variance based upon previous statement by Edina Planning staff regarding the need to create more drama to some of Edina's ramblers, therefore, staff was encouraging approval of some front yard variances. In view of this position and the fact that there is not living space encroaching into the setback Member Paulus believes the variance should be approved to be consistent.with a previously stated position. Member Maetzold advised of his intent to not support the variance request because he believes the reasons for requesting the variance are not sufficient to grant a variance. Member Kelly voiced concern being the deciding member in this variance request. However, she stated she has difficulty granting a six foot variance on a property that is 350 feet deep. Variances are granted only when a hardship condition exists. Member Kelly pointed out that the Zoning Board of Appeals decision was unanimous and she, supports that decision. Member Smith moved to affirm the denial of the Zoning Board of Appeals December 7, 1995 of the variance request of Nick and Athena Karos, 15 Circle West. Member Maetzold seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Nays: Paulus, Richards Motion carried. FINAL PLAT APPROVED FOR TAMBORNINO ADDITION (6608 DAKOTA TRAIL) Presentation by Planner Planner Larsen reviewed the proposed plat which is a 2.9 acre R -1 lot with an existing home accessing Dakota Trail. The new lot on the westerly side of the property would access Mohawk Trail. Planner Larsen noted that the only change from the preliminary plat is the name change from Tambomino Addition to Mohawk Woods. Planner Larsen recommended final plat approval based upon a subdivision dedication value of $175,000 and a forty (40) foot conservation restriction adjacent to Mohawk Trail. Mayor'Richards invited comment from the proponent or public. No comment was heard. Member Smith introduced the following resolution granting approval of the Mohawk Woods Final Plat conditioned upon subdivision dedication of eight percent based on a land value of $175,000 and execution of a forty foot front yard conservation restriction and moved its approval RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT MOHAWK WOODS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, that that certain plat entitled " MOHAWK WOODS" platted by Joseph Tambornino and presented at the regular City Council meeting of December 19, 1995, be and is hereby granted final plat approval with the following two conditions: 1. Payment of subdivision dedication fees in the amount of eight percent based upon a land value of $175,000; and 2. The execution of a conservation easement. Member Maetzold seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Resolution carried. ORDINANCE NO 1995 -11 ADOPTED ON SECOND READING - AMENDING CODE SECTION 900.18, SUBD 1 ELIMINATING THE RESTRICTION OF ORDERING A MEAL FOR SERVICE OF WINE Assistant Manager Hughes noted that Council conducted a public hearing on December 4, 1995 and granted First Reading to an ordinance amendment eliminating the requirement that a meal be served with wine; requiring that not less than 60 percent of the gross sales of the licensed premises be attributable to the sale of food; and requiring that not more than 15 percent of the seating capacity of the restaurant be located at a bar or service counter. The City Council directed that following two additional provisions be included in the amendment: 1. Requiring an affidavit be filed at the time of license renewal that documents the actual percentage of gross receipts attributable to the sale food during the preceding twelve months; and 2. Inclusion of a stronger training requirement for restaurant personnel. Assistant Manager Hughes explained that Section 1 of the proposed amendment includes language requiring documentation of actual gross receipts attributable to food sales. In addition, Section 2 provides the training requirement. The training provision requires attendance at an alcohol awareness program by 75 percent of the individuals authorized to serve alcoholic beverages and all licensed managers. The Council briefly discussed whether or not 75 percent was adequate for the training requirement. Consensus was that at license renewal time 75 percent was adequate since the ordinance requires all managers to be trained in order to be licensed. Public Comment Suzanne Wolf, representing Gabbert & Beck, the Galleria's management company stated that perhaps 25 percent of licensees employees do not serve wine such as kitchen staff. Susan Agrawal, 7438 Xerxes Avenue urged the Council to remain strict regarding the sale and service of liquor in Edina.. Member Maetzold moved Second Reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 1995 -11, motion seconded by Member Paulus. Member Kelly asked staff to respond to Ms. Wolfs comments regarding the 25 percent. Assistant Manager Hughes explained the ordinance requires 75 percent of employees authorized to serve wine or liquor, therefore, kitchen staff or hostesses would not be required to be trained. Member Smith moved to amend the motion adding to Paragraph A, of Section 2 of Ordinance 1995 -11 after the words Police Chief the following: "notwithstanding the atiove all employees authorized to serve or sell wine or liquor on the licensed premises have completed an alcohol awareness program approved by the Police Chief within thirty days." Member Maetzold seconded the motion. Member Paulus stated of her intention to vote against the amendment to the original motion because of the logistical problems it would cause. Member Kelly indicated her agreement with Member Paulus. Rollcall: Ayes: Members Maetzold, Smith Nays: Members Kelly, Paulus, Richards Amended motion failed. Mayor Richards called for the vote of the following ordinance as originally moved: ORDINANCE NO. 1995 -11 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Subdivision 1 of Subsection 900.18 of Section 900 of the City Code is amended as follows:, "Subd. 1. Percentage of Food Sold. No person, directly or indirectly, upon any pretense or by any device, shall sell any wine unless at least 60 percent of the gross receipts of the licensed premises on an annual basis are attributable to the sale of food. This requirement shall be established by an affidavit of the licensee on a form provided by the Clerk. The affidavit shall be given with each application for issuance or renewal of an on -sale wine license, or at other times as the clerk may request. If the application is for the renewal of an on -sale wine license, the affidavit shall also include the actual percentage of gross receipts attributable to the sale of food during the immediately preceding 12 month period. The Clerk, at any time and from time to time, may require that any such affidavit be verified and confirmed, on a form provided by the Clerk, by a Certified Public Accountant who is a member of the Minnesota Society of Certified Public Accountants. Failure or refusal of a licensee to give such affidavit with such application, or on request of the Clerk, or any false statement in any such affidavit, shall be grounds for denial, suspension or revocation of all licenses held by such licensee for the on -sale of wine." Section 2. Subsection 900.17 of Section 900 of the City Code is amended by adding a new Subd. 7 as follows: "Subd. 7. Training Requirement. No on -sale wine license or a manager's license shall be issued unless the applicant therefore shall have complied with the training requirements imposed by this Subd. 7. A. On-sale wine license. Within 30 days following the issuance of a new on -sale wine license, the licensee shall submit evidence satisfactory to the Clerk that not less than 75% of the employees authorized to serve or sell wine or liquor on the licensed premises have completed an alcohol awareness program approved by the Police Chief. An applicant for the renewal of an on -sale wine license shall submit evidence satisfactory to the Clerk that not less than 75% of the employees authorized to serve or sell wine or liquor on the licensed premises have, not more than 90 days prior to the date of the application, completed an alcohol awareness program approved by the Police Chief. B. Manager's License. An applicant for the issuance or renewal of a manager's license shall submit evidence satisfactory to the clerk that the manager has, not more than 90 days prior to the date of application, completed an alcohol awareness program approved by the Police Chief." Section 3. Subsection 900.20 of Section 900 of the City Code is amended as follows: 11900.20 Conditions of Sale. No person, directly or indirectly, upon any pretense or by any device, shall sell any intoxicating malt liquor unless in full compliance with the requirements imposed by Subsection 900.07 and Subsection 900.18 of this Code." Section 4. Subd. 1 of Subsection 900.17 of the City Code is amended by adding a new paragraph G as follows: "G. The premises shall have not more than 15% of its seating capacity located at a bar or service counter during the license period." Section 5. Subsection 900.21 of Section 900 of the City Code is deleted. Section 6. Subsection 900.01 of Section 900 of the City Code is amended by providing a new definition of "Bar". "Bar. A counter or similar kind of place or structure at which wine or liquor is served." Section 7. Subd. 3 of Subsection 900.18 of Section 900 is amended as follows: "Subd.3. Denied Sales or Consumption. No sales or consumption of wine shall be permitted beyond the licensed premises." Section S. Subsections 900.23, 900.24, and 900.25 of Section 900 of the City Code are hereby renumbered Subsections 900.21, 900.22, and 900.23 respectively. Section 9. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon passage. Frederick Richards, Mayor ATTEST: Debra Mangen, City Clerk Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Ordinance adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 1995 -8 ADOPTED UPON SECOND READING AMENDING SECTION 1215 AUTHORIZING THE CITY OT UNDERTAKE CERTAIN MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES IN THE GRANDVIEW COMMERCIAL AREA AND ASSESS THE COST Assistant Manager Hughes stated that at its December 4, 1996 meeting Council granted first reading to Ordinance 1995 -8 authorizing the City to undertake certain maintenance activities in the Grandview Commercial Area and assess the cost against the benefitted properties. Member Smith moved Second Reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 1995 -8 as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 19954 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1215 OF THE CITY CODE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO UNDERTAKE CERTAIN MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES IN THE GRANDVIEW COMMERCIAL AREA AND ASSESS THE COST THEREOF TO BENEFITTED PROPERTIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Subsection 1215.01 of the City Code is amended as follows: "1215.01 Definitions. The following terms shall have the stated meanings: 50th and France Commercial Area. The area within the City included within the plan prepared by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota, entitled, "50th and France Commercial Area Plan ", dated December 3, 1974. Grandview Commercial Area. The area within the City included within the plan prepared by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota, entitled, "Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan ", dated May 30, 1984. Parking Facility. City owned lots, lanes, ramps, and accessories on the surface, above ground, and underground." Section 2. The third line of Subsection 1215.02 of the City Code is amended as follows: "work in the 50th and France Commercial Area and the Grandview Commercial Area pursuant to Chapter 59, State Laws of 1983:" Section 3. The fourth line of Subsection 1215.03 of the City Code is amended as.follows: "or parcel of land within the 50th and France Commercial Area and the Grandview Commercial Area, in proportion to the benefits." Section 4. The third line of Subsection 1215.04 of the City Code is amended as follows: "within the 50th and France Commercial Area and the Grandview Commercial Area all costs of the work charged against the lot" Section 5. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon passage and publication. Frederick Richards, Mayor ATTEST: Debra Mangen, City Clerk Motion for adoption of the ordinance seconded by Member Maetzold. Rolicall: Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Richards Ordinance adopted. BOY SCOUTS RECOGNIZED Mayor Richards invited two boy scouts attending the meeting to introduce themselves. Kevin Smith and Eric Anderson Troop 48 located at Calvary Lutheran Church said they are working on their Citizenship Merit Badge and needed to attend a City Council meeting. The Mayor thanked the boys for attending the meeting. *BID AWARDED FOR PURCHASE OF POLICE SQUAD EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT. Motion by Member Smith, seconded by Member Kelly awarding the bid for purchase of police squad emergency equipment to sole bidder, Stretchers, Inc. in the amount of $17,819. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR STEEL BEAM STRUCTURAL WORK AT BRAEMAR. Motion by Member Smith, seconded by Member Kelly awarding the bid for the steel beam structural work at Braemar Golf Course to Minnetonka Iron Works in the amount of $8,250.00 Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW FOR DECEMBER 5. 1995. APPROVED Motion by Member Smith, seconded by member Kelly approving the following action recommended in Section A of the Traffic Safety Staff Review of December 5, 1995: 1) installation of a STOP sign controlling Cougar Court traffic at Malibu Drive; and to acknowledge Sections B and C. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. Mayor Richards left the Council meeting at 8:55 P.M. leaving Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly to conduct the remainder of the meeting. Mayor Pro tem Kelly reconvened the meeting at 9:00 P.M. INFORMAL HEARING - RECONSTRUCTION OF HIGHWAY 169 AND INTERSTATE 494 INTERCHANGE Engineer Hoffman informed the Council that an article had been placed in the Edina Sun - Current informing the public of the upcoming project MnDOT will be undertaking rebuilding the Highway 169 and Interstate 494 Interchange. He stated this is an informational presentation and no action is required of the Council since the project is entirely the State's responsibility. Engineer Hoffman introduced Ron Rachelle of the Predesign Department of MnDOT. Mr. Rachelle explained the reconstruction planned for the spring of 1997 will be an interim design. MnDOT will be rebuilding the Highway 169 bridge, the ramps, building some HIV lanes and improving the frontage roads. The area will not be completely shut down with at least two lanes in each direction always operating. The estimated cost of the project is $7 million and the life of the road is expected to be at least ten years. Council members indicated their disappointment with the cost of the project for an interim solution. Mr. Rachelle acknowledged the Council's concerns. Susan Agrawal asked several questions regarding the location of the proposed reconstruction, the potential of toll roads being built and why the project is a temporary design to which Mr. Rachelle responded. PUBLIC HEARING HELD: INCREASE IN BEER AND WINE LICENSE FEES FOR 1996 APPROVED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Pursuant to due notice given, a public hearing was conducted to consider increasing the fees for beer and wine licenses in accordance with M.S. 340A.408u, Subd. 3A. Assistant Manager Hughes reported that a copy of the notice was mailed to all licensees on November 17, 1995. No comment or correspondence has been received from holders of beer or wine licenses. Mayor Pro Tern Kelly called for public comments on the proposed license fee increase. No public comment or objection was heard. Motion by Member Smith approving the following beer and wine license fees effective January 1996, to be adopted by ordinance: On -Sale Wine: Restaurants with 50 or fewer seats $750 50 -100 seats, inclusive $820 101 -150 seats, inclusive $890 Over 150 seats $945 Managers License $70 On Sale 3.2 Beer. Renewal $230 New $290 Off-Sale 3.2 Beer. _ Renewal $230 New $290 Temporary 3.2 Beer License $50 Motion seconded by Member Maetzold Ayes: Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. *HEARING DATE SET OF JANUARY 16, 1996, FOR VACATION OF UTILITY/DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON LOT 7 BLOCK 1 KANE ADDITION (4809 WEST 66TH STREET) Motion by Member Smith, seconded by Member Kelly adopting the following resolution: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION OF EASEMENT FOR UTILITY AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota as follows: 1. It is hereby found and determined after receipt of the petition of the owner of the land affected thereby that the following described easement for utility and drainage purposes should be considered for vacation, in accordance with the provision of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 412.851 and 160.29; A portion of an existing utility and drainage easement lying within the following described property. The north 46.5 feet of the South 60.0 feet lying west of the East 6.0 feet thereof on Lot 7, Block 1, Kane Addition. 2. This Council shall meet at the time and place specified in the form of notice included in paragraph 3 hereof for the purpose of holding a public hearing on whether such vacation shall be made in the interest of the public. 3. The Clerk is authorized and directed to cause notice of the time, place and purpose of a said hearing to be.published once a week for two weeks, in the Edina Sun - Current being the official newspaper of the City, the first publication at least 14 days prior to the date of such hearing and to post such notice, at least 14 days prior to the date of such hearing, in at least three (3) public and conspicuous places within the City, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851. Such notice shall be in substantially the following form: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN THE CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota will meet at the Edina City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street on August 7, 1995, at 7:00 P.M. for the purpose of holding a public hearing on the proposed aerialivertical vacation of the following part of the drainage and utility easement over Lot 7, Block 1, KANE ADDITION according to the recorded plat. thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Also known as 4809 West 66th Street) described.as follows: A portion of an existing utility and drainage easement lying within the following described property: the north 46.5 feet of the South 60.0 feet lying west of the East 6.0 feet thereof on Lot 7, Block 1, KANE ADDITION. All persons who desire to be heard with respect to the question of whether or not the above proposed easement vacation is in the public interest and should be made shall be heard at said time and place. The Council shall consider the extent to which such proposed easement vacation affects existing easements within the area of the proposed vacation and the extent to which the vacation affects the authority of any person, lines, gas and sewer lines, or water pipes, mains and hydrants on or under the area of the proposed vacation, to continue maintaining the same or to enter upon such easement area or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto, for the purpose of specifying, in any such vacation resolution, the extent to which any or all of any such easements, and such authority to maintain and to enter upon the area of the proposed vacation shall continue. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL Debra Manaen, City Clerk Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. TECHNOLOGY PLAN REVIEWED Assistant Manager Hughes stated that in accordance with Council's direction, staff established a Technology Committee comprised of representativea from all City departments, charged with developing a Technology Plan. The committee identified two objectives: the planning process and focus for developing a Long Term Plan; and development of an Interim Plan to guide purchasing decisions during the development of the long term plan. Council briefly discussed the Interim Plan and gave a vote of confidence to the committee to proceed in the direction they were heading. 'RESOLUTION ADOPTED RECOMMENDING SALE OF TAX FORFEIT LAND TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS ONLY Motion by Member Smith, seconded by Member Kelly adopting the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina has received from the County of Hennepin a list of lands in said municipality which became the property of the State of Minnesota for non - payment of property taxes, which said list was dated November 20, 1995, Non - Conservation List 901 -NC; and WHEREAS, the parcel in said list identified as PINS No. 19 -028 -24-22 -0044 has heretofore be classified by the Board of County Commissioners of Hennepin County, Minnesota, as non - conservation land the sale thereof and has heretofore been authorized by said Board of County Commissioner; and WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Edina City Council that there are no existing or pending special assessments on said parcel; and WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Edina City Council that said. parcel need not be withheld from sale pursuant to M.S. 85.012; M.S. 92.461; M.S. 282.01, Subd. 8.; M.S. 282.018, Subd. 1; or M.S. 282.018, Subd. 2; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the said classification is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that, acting pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 282.01, Subd. 7a, it has determined that said parcel of land is not buildable according to the City's Zoning Ordinance and that sale of said parcel be limited to the adjacent property (PINS No. 19 -028 -24- 22 -0045) for attachment thereto. ANIMAL CONTROL REPORT Police Chief Bemhjelm told the Council that at their suggestion, he reviewed City practices for dealing with sick/injured wildlife with staff. The goal was to learn if better, more cost effective and operationally feasible methods existed for treating and/or euthanizing the wildlife. The report did not include domestic pets that are usually easier to handle because of close human contact and the risk of rabies is greatly reduced because of vaccination. PARK BOARD REFERENDA INPUT Director Keprios presented an updated report on the Park Board Referenda containing community input from nine community meetings that have been completed. Due to weather, the Senior Citizen Center general membership meeting was postponed and rescheduled for January 5, 1996. Additionally, the Edina School District administrative staff will view the slide presentation January 9, 1996. Comments received, in general have been very positive, supportive and informative. Question asked most often were: 1) Why have we not kept up with maintaining and replacing our wom infrastructure? 2) What is to prevent this from happening again in another twenty to thirty years? 3) If the issue passes, when will construction begin, how long before construction will be completed and in what priority? Director Keprios noted the most significant request came from the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee to build a $2.5 million free standing inter - generational activities building serving seniors, youth and adults. The Committee made a formal proposal at the December 12, 1995 Park Board meeting. The Park Board passed a motion requesting direction from the Council on the issue. The Park Board encouraged scheduling a joint meeting between the Board and the Council to review a variety of issues involving current and future funding of the park system and requested direction from the Council regarding the Senior Citizen Advisory Board's proposal. Lila Larson, Chairperson of the Edina Senior Center Advisory and Charlotte Burrow gave an informal presentation of the Senior Citizen Advisory Board's request for the construction of a free standing Senior Citizen Center. Some reasons cited for the request include: the current site's space constraints, parking difficulty, transportation, and the current location's third floor logistical difficulty for some seniors. Benefits could include improving the physical/emotional outlook of Edina senior citizens, utilizing the facility as an inter - generation gathering place and community outreach. Council discussed their concerns with: timing of the request, whether or not the schools had been approached relative to either parking or transportation, and the adequacy of the current senior center. Council directed staff to complete the neighborhood input meetings then to schedule a joint meeting with the Park Board. Also Council indicated that the final dollar amount of the upcoming referenda has not yet been determined and that a further update should be on the January 2, 1996 agenda. ORDINANCE NO. 1995 -12 ADOPTED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 185 INCREASING CERTAIN FEES FOR 1996: WITH WAIVER OF SECOND READING Member Smith moved adoption of Ordinance No. 1995 -12 as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 1995 -12 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. The following described fees of Schedule A to Code Section 185 are amended to read as follows: SEC SUBSEC. PURPOSE OF FEE/CHARGE AMOUNT FEENO. 300 300.02, Redemption of Subd. 2 impounded animals $15.00 per day for feeding 15 and care, any veterinarian services and impounding fee fee of: (a) If animal has not been 16 impounded within one year prior to the date of impounding - $35.00 (b) If animal has been 17 impounded once within the year prior to the date of impounding - $60.00 (c) If animal has been 18 impounded twice or more within one year prior to the date of impounding - $110.00 420 420.02 Excavation Permit $15.00 per 100 feet of 50 longitudinal excavation SEC SUBSEC. PURPOSE OF FEE/CHARGE AMOUNT -•450 450.27 Public or semi - public $340.00 per annum for each Subd 4 swimming pool license pool enclosed part or all of the year $180.00 per annurmfor each outdoor pool 450 450.27 Public or semi - public $90.00 per annum for each Subd 4 whirlpool bath or bath or pool therapeutic swimming pool license 87 460.06 Sign variance fee $125.00 for residential Subd 6 property $250.00 for commercial property 605 605.07 Permits required by UFC Minimum Fee: $40.00 Special hazard permit: Class I: General Hazard and fire safety inspections requiring a special hazard permit - $40.00 Class II: Special hazard inspection involving various hazardous materials and /or processes in occupancies or buildings less than 3000 s.f. in area - $60.00 Class III: Special hazard inspection primarily directed at, but not limited to, buildings or occupancies 3000 s.f. or larger where any of the following are present - $135.00 A. Multiple hazards B. Storage handling, and /or processes involving C. Occupancies in which evaluation or high valuation presents unique circumstances 615 615.03 License to service $20.00 per annum per person to fire extinguishers be licensed 620 620.04 Permit fee for $60.00 for each permit cleaning of commercial cooking ventilation system 625 625.04 Sprinkler permit fees: Number of heads 1 - 5 1 40.00 (minimum fee) 6 -10 "$ 65.00 11- 20 1 90.00 21- 30 "$115.00 31-40 "$137.00 41- 50 *$159.001 51- 60 "$181.00 FEE NO. 81 82 83 87 88 95 96 97 98 100 105 110 SEC SUBSEC. PURPOSE OF FEE/CHARGE AMOUNT 61- 70 *$195.00 71- 80 *$203.00 81- 90 *$223.00 91-100 *$232.00 101-110 *$241.00. ' 111-120 *$249.00 121-130 *$257.00 131-140 *$265.00 141-150 *$273.00 151-160 *$280.00 161-170 *$287.00 171-180 *$294.00 181-190 *$301.00 191-200 *$308.0 201 plus *$308.00 for first 200 plus $7.00 for each additional head *plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 168.70 625 625.03 Fire pump installation $85.00 and associated hardware 635 635.02 716 716.02 720 720.04, Subd 3 Standpipe installation $85.00 Each additional $10.00 standpipe False fire alarm Recycling service: Single family Double bungalow Apartments /condos (2-8 units) Food establishment license Day care, limited food establishment license Take -out food facility license Packaged food sales license Food warehouse license Catering food $250.00 for the third and each subsequent response within one calendar year $6.96 per quarter 6.96 per quarter 5.70 per quarter $495.00 per annum, $445.00 if certified pursuant to Subsection 720.04, Subd. 3C of this Code, plus $130.00 per annum for each additional facility $155.00 per annum $330.00 per annum, $280.00 if certified pursuant to Subsection 720.04, Subd. 3C of this Code $150.00 per annum $80.00 $495.00 per annum, $45.00 if establishment license certified pursuant to Subsection 720.04, Subd. 3C of this Code, FEE NO. 118 119 120 125 131 132 - 133 135 136 137 138 139 140 SEC SUBSEC. PURPOSE OF FEEICHARGE AMOUNT FEENO. plus $130.00 per annum for each additional facility Itinerant food $85.00 per event 141 establishment license Retail candy shop $60.00 per annum, plus 142 $10700 per license annum for each additional facility Potentially hazardous $100.00 per annum 143 food vehicle license Fleet of 5 or more $500.00 per annum 1 4 4 potentially hazardous food vehicles license Catering food vehicle $180.00 per annum, plus _ 145 license $35.00 per annum for each additional vehicle Food vehicle license $100.00 per annum 146 Fleet of 5 or more $500.00 per annum 147 food vehicles license Pushcart license $145.00 per annum 147a 735 735.03 Hotel, lodging or Hotels - $250.00 for 1-50 rooms and 155 boarding house $2.00 per each room over 50 license 850 850.04 Variance fee Residential $125.00 190 Subd 1C Commercial $250.00 191 900 900.06, Non - intoxicating malt Subd.1 liquor license: On -sale $230.00 per annum (renewal) 207 $290.00 per annum (new) 208 900 900.00, Off -sale $230.00 per annum (renewal) 209 Subd. 2 $290.00 per annum (new) 900 900.16, Temporary on -sale $50.00 211 Subd. 3 non4ntoxicating malt liquor license 900 900.16, On -sale wine license (per year): Subd.1 Restaurants with 50 or fewer seats _ $750.00 212 51 -100 seats, inclusive $820.00 213 101 -150 seats, inclusive $890.00 214 Over 150 seats $945.00 215 900 900.17, Managers license $ 70.00 per year 216 Subd. 6A 1020 1020.02 False automatic alarm $100.00 for the third and each 220 subsequent response 110 1100.03, Sewer service charge: Subd. 2 Single family dwellings, Based upon water usage during towm houses, two-family quarter (Three month period falling dwettings, apartment between November 1 and March 1) buildings containing four or less dwelling units: SEC SUBSEC. PURPOSE OF FEE/CHARGE To and including 1600 cubic feet From 1601 cubic feet and over 1100 1100.03, Sewer service charge: Subd. 2 Commercial and industrial buildings, including schools and churches 1100 1100.03, Water service: Subd. 2 1100 1100.03, Meter charge: Subd. 2 1105 1105.01, Service Availability Subd.1 Charge (SAC) 1300 1300.02, Refuse or recycling Subd.1 hauler license 1305 1305.03 Scavenger license AMOUNT FEE NO. $26.72 quarter 235 $1.67 per 100 cubic feet 236 $34.00 per water meter or approved 238 sewage metering device on premises, or $1.67 per 100 cubic feet of water used during the quarter, whichever is greater 1. $0.58 per 100 cubic feet for areas City, except areas described below in 2. 2. $1.34 per 100 cubic feet for Morningside area and for east side of Beard Av. from West 54th St. to Fuller St. and both sides of Abbott PI. from West 54th St. to Beard Av. 3. Excessive use charge $.191100 cubic ft. Up to 3/4 inch meter $ 7.06 /quarter 1 inch meter 11/4 inch meter 1 % inch meter 2 inch meter 3 inch meter 4 inch meter 9.56 /quarter 10.93 1quarter 12.30 /quarter 19.81 1quarter 75.14/quarter 95.63 1quarter $900.00 per SAC unit x number of SAC units computed pursuant to Subsection 1105.01, Subd.1 of this Code $220.00 per annum for first vehicle, $ 60.00 for each additional vehicle $170.00 for first license, $120.00 for each annual renewal thereof Section 2. Schedule A to Section 185 is hereby amended by adding the following fees thereto: 435 435.07 Gas piping permit administrative license $25.00 Section 4. Following publication, the effective date of this Ordinance shall be January 1, 1996 ATTEST: City Clerk Motion for adoption of the ordinance seconded by Member Paulus Rollcall: Ayes: Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Kelly Ordinance adopted. 242 243 244 245 250 270 275 61a Mayor RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED APPROVING 1996 PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FEEXHARGES, AMBULANCE FEES AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES: Member Paulus made a motion to approve and adopt the following resolution: $20.00 $55.00 1 RESOLUTION SETTING 1996 PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FEES PARK & RECREATION Playground $10.00 Pee Wee Tennis Coach Pitch $30.00 Team Tennis_ Tennis Instruction $30.00 ATHLETIC ACCOUNT FEES Adult Summer Softball: Co -Rec_ & Mans Classic Leagues $ 330.00 Mons, Womens, 35 & Over & Industrial Leagues $ 295.00 Non - Resident Fee (individual) $ 25.00 Non - Resident Fee (team) $ 150.00 Fall Adult Softball: Co-Rec Leagues $ 225.00 Mons Leagues $ 200.00 Non - Resident Fee (individual) $ 25.00 Non - Resident Fee (team) $ 150.00 Adult Volleyball: Officiated Leagues $ 205.00 Non-Officiated Leagues $ 100.00 Non - Resident (individual) $ 10.00 Adult Softball Post Season Tournament: Team Entry Fee $ 50.00 Adult Basketball: 3 -Man League $ 40.00 5 -Man C League $ 375.00 5 -Man B League $ 375.00 Adult Hockey: 4 -Man League $ 100.00 Adult Broomball: Co-Rec League $ 450.00 Adult Bandy: A -Division $1,550.00 B- Division $1,125.00 C- Division $ 625.00 ART CENTER Memberships Family $ 35.00 Individual $ 25.00 Class Fees" (based on number of hours in class) - (Members -10% discount) Non - Members 25 hrs $ 3.58 24 hrs $4.08 21 hrs $ 4.35 14 hrs $ 4.64 12 hrs $ 4.92 8 hrs $ 5.25 5 hrs $ 5.65 4 hrs $ 6.15 Fall clay and children's classes add $5 Parent/Child Workshops (includes 1 child 81 adult) Non -Mem /Mem 90 min $15/13 2 hrs $17115 $20.00 $55.00 1 3 hrs $21119 4 hrs $27125 5 hrs $31128 6 hrs $34/31 7 hrs $39135 8 hrs $42138 *all clay classes add $5 ARENA Hourly Rate (as of Sept., 1995) $110.00 Open skating (Youth & Adult) $ 2.50 Skate Rental $ 1.50 Skate Sharpening $ . 2.50 Season Tickets (eff. 1011/95) Resident Family: first 2 members $ 52.00 each additional member $ 5.00 maximum (7 persons) $ 77.00 Resident Individual $ 42.00 Non - Resident Family: first 2 members $ 67.00 each additional member $ 5.00 maximum (7 persons) $ 92.00 Non - Resident Individual $ 52.00 Classes $ 60.00 GUN RANGE Pistol ' /z hour $ 5.00 25 rounds trap $ 5.00 Building /hr $ 50.00 Daily rental $ 165.00 Firearm Safety $ 6.00 AQUATIC CENTER Season Tickets Resident Family first 2 members $ 45.00 each additional member $ 10.00 maximum (8 members) $ 105.00 Resident Individual $ 40.00 Non - Resident Family first 2 members $ 65.00 each additional member $ 10.00 maximum (8 members) $ 125.00 Non - Resident Individual $ 60.00. Daily Admission $ 5.00 Admission after 6 p.m. $ 3.00 Aquatic Instruction $ 40.00 GOLF COURSE - BRAEMAR Green Fees .18 hole - non patron $ 21.00 18 hole - patron $ 17.00 9 hole - non patron $ 11.50 9 hole - patron $ 9.50 Group Fees -18 holes $ 29.00 Group Fees - 9 hole $ 15.00 Patron Cards Individual $ 55.00 Executive Course $ 25.00 Computerized Handicaps Resident - $ 16.00 Non - Resident $ 21.00 Lockers Men's 72" $ 35.00 Men's 42" $ 25.00 Ladies' 72" $ 15.00 Club Storage $ 35.00 Club Rental $ 7.00 Pull Carts $ 2.25 Golf Cars 18 holes $ 20.00 9 holes $ 12.00 18 holes /one person w /disability $ 10.00 Group Car Fees $ 30.00 Group Golf Lessons Adult $ 58.00 Junior $ 30.00 EXECUTIVE COURSE - BRAEMAR Adult - non - patron $ 8.00 Adult - patron $ 7.00 Junior - non patron $ 6.00 Junior - patron $ 5.00 Golf Cars - everyone $ 10.00 Pull Carts $ 1.75 Group Fees $ 11.00 BRAEMAR ROOM Resident - wedding related $ 625.00 Non - resident - wedding related $ 675.00 Other events $250 -5675 Concession Fees (an annual increase of 5 %, as a general rule) EXECUTIVE COURSE - NORMANDALE Adult - non - patron $ 9.00 Adult - patron $ 8.00 Junior - non - patron $ 6.00 Junior - patron $ 5.00 Golf Cars - everyone $ 10.00 Pull Carts $ 1.75 Group Fees $ 11.00 GOLF RANGE Large Bucket $ 5.00 Small Bucket $ 3.00 Warm -up Bucket $ 1.50 GOLF DOME Large Bucket $ 5.50 Senior Bucket $ 5.25 Time Golf' /2 hour $ 8.00 Hourly field rental $ 100.00 League $695.00 EDINBOROUGH Daily Passes $ 3.00 Season Passes Edina Family first 2 members $ 195.00 each additional member $ 15.00 maximum (7 members) $ 270.00 Edina Individual $ 180.00 Non Edina Family 100.00 use of rink area first 2 members' $ 215.00 each additional member $ 20.00 maximum (7 members) $ 315.00 Non Edina Individual $ 195.00 Towel Fee $ 0.75 Skate Rental $ 1.50 Building Rentals 75.00 Ice Rink Commercial Use (Trade Shows) $2,500.00 Category #1 City of Edina & Boards /Assoc. $ 200.00 May -Oct 517 /day +512 1man setup /down $ Category #2 (per hour) Theatre $ Edina Civic & Edina Schools (M -Th) Great Hall $ Great Hall $ 150.00 Theatre $ 75.00 Grotto $ 50.00 Category #3- General Fees(per hour) Great Hall $ 300.00 Grotto $ 75.00 Theatre $ 125.00 Category #4- Exclusive Rentals Friday Evening $1,500.00 Saturday Evening $1,500.00 Rental Amenities banners $ 100.00 use of rink area $ 125.00 cover ice area $ 400.00 Domestic Photo Shoot (hourly) any park area blocked off $ 50.00 Grotto $ 50.00 Theatre $ 75.00 Great Hall $ 75.00 Ice Rink $ 100.00 Commercial Photo Shoot (hourly) any park area blocked off $ 200.00 Grotto $ 200.00 Theatre $ 200.00 Great Hall $ 300.00 Ice Rink $ 300.00 CENTENNIAL LAKES Rental Concession'items Paddle Boats 2- person boat) % hr $ 3.00 4- person boatt % hr $ 5.00 Winter sled/' /2 hr $ 3.00 Ice Skates $ 1.50 Building Rental Monday - Thursday '/2 day -'/2 room $ 125.00 % day - full room $ 250.00 full day -'/2 room $ 200.00 full day -full room $ 400.00 Friday Evening (6pm -10pm) $ 50.00 % evening -'/: room $ 200.00 '/2 evening - full room $ 400.00 Weekend Rental Full Evening (6pm - lam) $ 700.00 Friday Evening $ 600.00 Saturday Evening $ 600.00 Sunday Rentals $ 35.00 % room /4hr increments after 2PM $ 200.00 full room /4hr increments after 2PM $ 400.00 PARK DEPARTMENT RENTALS General Park Areas: commercial use (i.e. T.V.) /hour $ 50.00 commercial use with lights /hour $ 100.00 Picnic Shelter /day - Cornelia $ 70.00 Snowmobile /day $ 700.00 Athletic Fields - residents only per field /day $ 100.00 per field /hour $ 35.00 per hourifield with lights $ 55.00 Arneson Acres Terrace Room per day; w/formal gardens /gazebo $ 125.00 per hour, first hour $ 50.00 each add'I hour up to 4 hrs $ 25.00 Tupa Park: Cahill School & Grange Hall per day $ 125.00 per hour, first hour $ 50.00 each add'I hour, up to 4 hrs $ 25.00 VanValkenburg & Courtney Fields - residents only per field /day, includes building $ 150.00 Edina Athletic Associations field user fee /participant $ 6.00 Edina Hockey Association outdoor hockey rink/ fee /participant $ 6.00 Member Maetzold seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Kelly Resolution adopted. RESOLUTION SETTING AMBULANCE FEES FOR 1996 Member Maetzold made a motion to approve and adopt the resolution setting Ambulance Fees for 1996: AMBULANCE FEES Service Level Fees for Ambulance Service, including medical treatment and /or transportation to a medical facility: Level I - ON SCENE TREATMENT $ 170.00 Specialized medical services performed at scene with no transport involved Level II - 'MINOR CARE (BLS) $ 380.00 Vital Signs Splinting Bandaging, etc. Level III - MODERATE CARE (ALS), $ 465.00 I.V. Cell EKG Monitoring Spine Immobilization Level IV - MAJOR CARE $ 535.00 Level III plus any: Medications MAST (inflated) Additional Manpower . Mechanical Extrication Level V - CARDIAC ARREST $ 655.00 Level IV plus any: Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) . Defibrillation OXYGEN ADMINISTRATION $ 30.00 MILEAGE FROM SCENE TO HOSPITAL $ 8.00 1mile Motion seconded by Member Paulus. Rollcall: Ayes: Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Kelly Resolution adopted. RESOLUTION SETTING MISCELLANEOUS FEES FOR 1996 Member Smith made a motion to approve and adopt the following resolution: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS /SPILLS RESPONSE ENGINE/FIRE COMPANY $180.00 per hour /2 hour minimum HAZMAT UNIT $360.00 per hour SPECIALIZED PERSONNEL Regular Pay Rate /2 hour minimum SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT Cost + 15% administrative charge SUPPLIES 'Cost + 15% administrative charge DISPOSAL Cost + 15% administrative charge OTHER CITY RESOURCES Cost + 15% administrative charge PLANNING DEPARTMENT ZONING COMPLIANCE LETTER $50.00 Motion seconded by Member Maetzold. Rollcall: Ayes: Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Kelly Resolution adopted. "CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS STATUS REPORT PRESENTED Motion made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Kelly acknowledging receipt of the status report on construction projects presented by Finance Director Wallin. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. CLAIMS PAID Member Smith made a motion to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 15, 1995, and consisting of 31 pages: General Fund $349,197.34; C.D.B.G. $1,713.00; Communications $8,091.22; Working Capital $10,482.42; Art Center $11,456.07; Swimming Pool Fund $244.82; Golf Course Fund $51,700.01; Ice Arena Fund $22,001.40; Gun Range Fund $466.59; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes $29,837.99; Utility Fund $40,475.29; Storm Sewer Utility Fund $23,897.98; Recycling Program $35,718.27; Liquor Dispensary Fund $70,837.41; Construction Fund $18,252.38; TOTAL $673,372.19; and for confirmation of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 7, 1995, and consisting of 9 pages: General Fund $117,735.76; Golf Course Fund $404.65; Liquor Dispensary Fund $345,096.20; TOTAL $463,236.61. Motion seconded by Member Paulus. Ayes: Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Pro Tern Kelly adjourned the meeting at 10:38 P.M. City Clerk MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL ON DECEMBER 28,1995 AT 5:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Maetzold, Paulus, Smith and Mayor Pro Tern Kelly. 1995 YEAR END BUDGET FORECAST PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED Manager Rosland explained details of the year end projects for the City's General Fund revenues and expenditures. An increase in undesignated reserves of $402,000 is anticipated for 1995. A summary of the major categories was presented as follows: The increase is because revenues for Buildings Permits, Ambulance Fees and Municipal Court Fines exceeded budgeted revenues by $299,000. In addition, the expenditures are expected to be approximately $103,000 under budget. Major areas are: Public Works under by $80,000 due primarily to underspending in the commodities and personnel areas; Police Department under by $55,000 because not fully staffed until late in the year, Fire Department over by approximately $150,000 because of overtime that ambulance fees can partially offset; and the Park Department under budget by $70,000 because of underspending in personnel and contractual services. A brief discussion followed concerning the rebuilding of the reserve and strategies to reduce Fire Department overtime. Member Smith asked that the issue be placed on a future agenda for action during 1996. PRELIMINARY AOL FIRE STATION PLAN VIEWED Manager Rosland showed the Council the preliminary plan of the proposed Advanced Life Support Fire Station to be built during 1996. Manager Rosland pointed out the station can house three vehicles, an ambulance, a fire pumper and another utility vehicle as necessary. The intent at this time is to use the station as a power shift to improve response time and reduce overtime. It is hoped that bids will be received and let in March of 1996 with construction of the station beginning in the spring of 1996. CLAIMS PAID. Member Smith moved to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 21, 1995, General Fund $153,361.49; C.D.B.G. $5,865.00; Communications $3,429.33; Working Capital $8,307.04; Art Center $4,696.06; Swimming Pool Fund $834.35; Golf Course Fund $14,004.68; Ice Arena Fund $5,315.38; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes $7,536.54; Utility Fund $308,377.05; Storm Sewer Utility Fund $324.02; Liquor Dispensary Fund $56,395.25; TOTAL $568,446.19. Motion seconded by Member Maetzold. Ayes: Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Pro Tern Kelly adjourned the meeting at 5:35 P.M. City Clerk 1995 1995 Estimated Budget Balance Revenues: Property Taxes $11,095,000 $11,080,898 $14,102 Licenses & Permits 1,072,000 921,710 150,290 Fees & Charges 1,843,000 1,730,000 113,000 Other Revenues 483,000 478,500 4,500 Intergovernmental Aid 1,529,100 1,512.120 16,980 Total Revenues 16.022,100 15,723.228 298,872 Total Expenditures 15.647,360 15,723,227 75,867 Total Central Services .4.650.217 4,677.371 27,154 Less: Equipment Replace Reserve 0 Net Increase to Surplus Estimated Surplus Dec. 31, 1995 $1,396,308 The increase is because revenues for Buildings Permits, Ambulance Fees and Municipal Court Fines exceeded budgeted revenues by $299,000. In addition, the expenditures are expected to be approximately $103,000 under budget. Major areas are: Public Works under by $80,000 due primarily to underspending in the commodities and personnel areas; Police Department under by $55,000 because not fully staffed until late in the year, Fire Department over by approximately $150,000 because of overtime that ambulance fees can partially offset; and the Park Department under budget by $70,000 because of underspending in personnel and contractual services. A brief discussion followed concerning the rebuilding of the reserve and strategies to reduce Fire Department overtime. Member Smith asked that the issue be placed on a future agenda for action during 1996. PRELIMINARY AOL FIRE STATION PLAN VIEWED Manager Rosland showed the Council the preliminary plan of the proposed Advanced Life Support Fire Station to be built during 1996. Manager Rosland pointed out the station can house three vehicles, an ambulance, a fire pumper and another utility vehicle as necessary. The intent at this time is to use the station as a power shift to improve response time and reduce overtime. It is hoped that bids will be received and let in March of 1996 with construction of the station beginning in the spring of 1996. CLAIMS PAID. Member Smith moved to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 21, 1995, General Fund $153,361.49; C.D.B.G. $5,865.00; Communications $3,429.33; Working Capital $8,307.04; Art Center $4,696.06; Swimming Pool Fund $834.35; Golf Course Fund $14,004.68; Ice Arena Fund $5,315.38; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes $7,536.54; Utility Fund $308,377.05; Storm Sewer Utility Fund $324.02; Liquor Dispensary Fund $56,395.25; TOTAL $568,446.19. Motion seconded by Member Maetzold. Ayes: Maetzold, Paulus, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Pro Tern Kelly adjourned the meeting at 5:35 P.M. City Clerk CA REPORT /RECOMMENDATION TO: Mayor and Council Agenda Item # I I. A. FROM: David velde Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To 'HRA DATE: January 2, 1996 ® To Council SUBJECT: ordinance No. 1995 -13, Action Motion An ordinance Requiring the E] Resolution Licensing and Inspection of Parking ® Ordinance Garages adiacent to Multiple Residential Discussion Buildings. Recommendation: Grant second reading to Ordinance No. 1995 -13 requiring the licensing and inspection of parking garages adjacent to multiple residential buildings and amending Section 185 of the City Code by adding a $ 100.00 fee for the parking garage license. Information /Background: e On December 4, 1995, The City Council granted first reading to this Ordinance. Staff was directed to notify all affected property owners or managers about the Ordinance that's under consideration for their input. On December 12, 1995, notices were sent to fifty -one property owners or managers who control the 113 multiple residential buildings identified as being impacted by this Ordinance. A copy of the proposed Ordinance was included with this mailing. Staff has received four calls regarding this proposed Ordinance, all opposing the licensing and fee. General comments addressed the issue of this being more bureaucracy; its just another form of a tax; and a general belief that they are doing a good job at operating their buildings so why should they pay for the people who do not keep up their equipment. The changes which have been included on Ordinance 1995 -13 since first reading was granted include a Section 3., which amends Section 185 by adding a new fee of $100.00 for the license of the garage and technical changes to Section 740.05 replacing Section 1 and 2 with Subd. 1 and 2. A Ordinance No. 1995 - 13 An Ordinance Requiring the Licensing and Inspection-of Parking Garages adjacent to Multiple Residential Buildings The City Council of the City of Edina Ordains: Section 1. An Ordinance creating a new Ordinance Section 740 Licensing Parking Garages. Section 740 - Ventilation of Parking Garages for Multiple Dwellings Section 740.01 Purpose and Objectives -The purpose of this Section is to protect the public from unacceptable levels of carbon monoxide in dwelling units. The general objectives of this Section include the following: A. Prevent carbon monoxide from exceeding the maximum limit in dwelling units. B. Monitor carbon monoxide levels periodically. C. Correct and prevent conditions that may allow unacceptable carbon monoxide levels. Section 740.02 Terms and Definitions Multiple Dwelling Any building with three or more dwelling units as defined by Section 850 of the Code. Parking Garage An enclosure used for vehicle parking measuring over 1000 square feet in area and capable of being closed off from ambient air. Ventilation System An air exchange system operated by an electric exhaust fan and inlet opening designed to ventilate a parking garage Section 740.03 Scope. This section shall be applicable to all multiple dwellings with a wall, floor, or ceiling adjacent to a parking garage. Section 740.04 License Required. No person shall own or operate a parking garage with a wall, floor or ceiling which is adjacent to any multiple dwelling without first obtaining a license from the City. Subd. 1. License Application. The application for a license under this Section shall be submitted on forms provided by the City Clerk. The application shall be accompanied by the fee in the amount set forth in Section 185 of this Code. Subd. 2. License Procedure and Control. The provisions of Section 160 of this Code shall apply to all licenses required by this Section and the holders of such licenses. Subd. 3. Term. Licenses issued pursuant to this Section shall expire on December 31st of each calendar year. Section 740.05 Standards Subd. 1. Maximum level of Carbon Monoxide. At no time shall the level of carbon monoxide exceed 9.0 parts per million (ppm) within any dwelling unit, or other area located in a multiple dwelling which is designed or used for residential occupancy. Subd. 2. Ventilation. All components of ventilation systems shall comply with the requirements of the Uniform Mechanical Code and shall at all times be fully operable for the purpose of ventilating the. parking garage. Section 740.06 Inspections Right of Entry. For the purpose of determining compliance with the provisions of this Section, the Sanitarian is authorized to make inspections at such times as the Sanitarian deems necessary, to determine the condition of the property and the carbon monoxide level. For the purpose of making such inspections, the Sanitarian is authorized to enter, examine and survey all dwellings, dwelling units, rooms, garages, and premises upon which the same are located at all reasonable times including peak traffic periods. The owner, operator and occupant of every dwelling, dwelling unit, and rooms, shall give the Sanitarian free access to such dwelling, dwelling unit or room and its premises including parking garages for the purpose of such inspection, examination, and survey. Every occupant of a dwelling unit or rooms shall give the owner of it, or the owner's agent or employee, access to any part of the dwelling unit or its premises, including parking garages, at all reasonable times, for the purpose of making the repairs or alterations as are necessary to effect compliance with the provisions of this Section. Section 740.07 Enforcement Subd. 1. Notice of Violation. Whenever the Sanitarian determines that there has been L a violation of any one or more provisions of this Section, the Sanitarian shall give notice of such alleged violation to the license holder in person or by registered mail. The notice, shall: A. Specify the violation or violations alleged to exist or to have been committed and the repairs or improvements required to bring the dwelling, dwelling unit or rooms into compliance with the provisions of this Section. B. . Provide a time limit or the correction of the violation or violations specified. If the license holder cannot be found or served after diligent effort, service may be made upon such person or persons by posting a notice in a conspicuous place in or about the dwelling affected by the notice, in which event the Sanitarian shall include in the record a statement as to why such posting was necessary. Subd. 2. Imminent Hazard; 'Temporary Condemnation. Whenever the Sanitarian finds any dwelling, dwelling unit or rooms in a multiple dwelling in violation of the standards established by this Section, and further finds (I) that by reason of such violation it presents an imminent and serious hazard to public health, or to the physical or mental health of the occupants in it, and (ii) that the repairs or improvements required to correct the violation do not appear reasonably possible within a time which will be adequate to eliminate such imminent hazard, then the written notice of violation provided for in Subd. 1 of this Subsection shall also state that the premises are unfit for human habitation and shall order that the dwelling, dwelling unit or rooms be vacated either immediately or after such period of time as the Sanitarian shall find reasonable in view of the circumstances, pending the completion of action to eliminate the violation. In such case the notice shall be served by delivering a copy to the person in real or apparent charge and control of the multiple dwelling and by posting the same at a conspicuous place upon the structure. In the case of a hazard which affects more than one dwelling unit in a multiple dwelling, service shall be made upon an occupant of each dwelling unit, except that the failure to make service upon an occupant of one unit shall not affect the validity or effect of service of notice upon an occupant of other units. Subd. 3. Failure to Correct Deficiencies. Whenever notice has been given in accordance with Subd. 1 of this Subsection and the license holder has failed to correct the deficiencies specified in Subd. 1 of this Section within the time allowed, the Sanitarian may either: A. Extend the time for correction of the deficiencies, or B. Serve upon the license holder a written notice requiring that the dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooms be vacated because it is unfit for human habitation. The notice shall (I) state the violation or violations which remain uncorrected, and (ii) provide a time limit, within which to vacate the premises. The written extension of time or notice to vacate may be served personally or by registered mail in accordance with the procedures set forth in Subd.1 of this Subsection. Subd. 4. Correction of Violation by City; Assessment of Cost. If the license holder fails to comply, the Sanitarian may proceed to abate or remove the violation and have costs assessed against the property according to procedures set forth in Section 1070 of the City Code. Subd. 5. Unlawful to Resume Occupancy. No dwelling, dwelling unit or rooming unit which has been designated as unfit for human habitation and placarded as such shall again be used for human habitation until written approval is secured from, and such placarding is removed by, the Sanitarian. The Sanitarian shall remove such placard whenever the defect or defects upon which the designation and placarding action were based have been eliminated and the dwelling, dwelling unit or rooming unit has been made to conform to the standards established by this Section. Subd. 6. Unlawful to Deface Placard. It shall be unlawful for any person to deface, remove or obscure any placard posted under the provisions of this Section. Section 2. Schedule A of Section 185 of the City Code is hereby amended by adding the following fee: Purpose Subse of Fee /Cha=se out Fee No. 740 740.04 Parking Garage Fee $100.00 158 Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. 4,91N�1r.� o e�� o o• NOTICE December 12, 1995 To All Interested Parties: City of Edina The Edina City Council will meet on January 2, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. to consider an Ordinance which will require the licensing of apartment buildings, condominiums and other multiple residential buildings which have enclosed parking garages adjacent to the building. This ordinance was presented to the City Council on December 4, 1995 and was granted first reading. The proposed fee for this license will be $ 100.00 per year and will become effective April 1, 1996 if passed by the Edina City Council. This Ordinance is being considered because of the need to monitor the effectiveness of the ventilation for these garages. This is warranted based upon over 20 years of experience in monitoring multiple residential buildings with enclosed parking garages and finding numerous instances where excessive carbon monoxide concentrations have been found in living spaces. If these occurrences had not been found, the residents of the building could have suffered harmful health effects which may not be noticeable for several years. A copy of the proposed Ordinance is included with this notice. Please review the Ordinance and contact David Velde at 927 -8861 with your concerns or comments. Also, feel free to express your view in person on January 2, 1996 by attending the City Council meeting. In addition, written comments may be sent to City Hall by no later than December 28, 1995 so they may be included with the City Council packet for the Tuesday meeting. Please address any written comments to the attention of the Edina City Clerk, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, MN 55424. COAPTAOT City Hall (612) 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 927 -7645 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 927 -5461 ° N`' REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: FRANCIS HOFFMAN, CITY ENGINEER VIA: Kenneth Rosland City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5.00 DATE: JANUARY 2, 1996 AGENDA ITEM ITEM DESCRIPTION: 2.1 GB, 90 MHz, Pentium Computer and Monitor Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. AmeriData 2• OPM Information Systems 3. 4. 5. 1• $5,837.00 plus tax 2. 6,264.00 plus tax 3. 4. 5. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: AmeriData at $5,837.00 plus tax. GENERAL INFORMATION: 2.1 GB, 90 MHz Pentium Computer and Monitor less networking hardware. � /k ol Si ature The Recommended bid is X — within budget no t Engineering Department with"bu et allin, Fi nce Director Kenneth Rosland, City Mana er i A. oe�:r� Cn �C�7RPOMtic i � +xtl REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: mayor Richards and members of the Edina City Council From: John Keprios, Director Edina Park & Recreation Dept. Date: December Subject: Park Referenda and Citizen Center. RECOMMENDATION: Agenda Item # IV_ A. Consent Information Only ; 1 Mgr. Recommends ; i To HRA 1. As directed by the Edina City Council,-staff has prepared three separate scenarios to help lead the discussion with regards to setting a final dollar amount for the proposed Park Improvement Bond Issue. 2. Staff recommends that the Edina City Council choose May 7, 1996, as the official date for the special election park - related bond referenda. 3. As directed by the City Council, the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee proposal for an Activities Center is part of this agenda item for discussion. The Edina Park Board is requesting direction from the City Council on this matter. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: PARK IMPROVEMENT BOND ISSUE DOLLAR AMOUNT On December 19, 1995, the Edina City Council discussed the two park - related bond referenda and the Edina Senior Citizen Advisory Council's proposal. As a result, the City Council directed staff to itemize the input from the community concerning the proposed bond referenda and present scenarios with regards to the proposed dollar amount. Staff has prepared three different bond issue amounts, which are designated as follows: Scenario #1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 $4,900,000 $5,670,000 $6,111,000 Scenario #1 is the dollar amount initially proposed by the City Council. To Council Action g Motion n Resolution Ordinance l Discussion 1. As directed by the Edina City Council,-staff has prepared three separate scenarios to help lead the discussion with regards to setting a final dollar amount for the proposed Park Improvement Bond Issue. 2. Staff recommends that the Edina City Council choose May 7, 1996, as the official date for the special election park - related bond referenda. 3. As directed by the City Council, the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee proposal for an Activities Center is part of this agenda item for discussion. The Edina Park Board is requesting direction from the City Council on this matter. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: PARK IMPROVEMENT BOND ISSUE DOLLAR AMOUNT On December 19, 1995, the Edina City Council discussed the two park - related bond referenda and the Edina Senior Citizen Advisory Council's proposal. As a result, the City Council directed staff to itemize the input from the community concerning the proposed bond referenda and present scenarios with regards to the proposed dollar amount. Staff has prepared three different bond issue amounts, which are designated as follows: Scenario #1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 $4,900,000 $5,670,000 $6,111,000 Scenario #1 is the dollar amount initially proposed by the City Council. ,1 ' I ! -2- Scenario #2 is similar to the first scenario with an added $770,000 in new park amenities based on the feedback from the community at the various community input meetings. Scenario #3 is similar to Scenario #2 with an added $441,000 in new park amenities based on the following: 1. Input from the Park and Recreation Services Public Opinion Survey, which was completed in 1988. 2. Staff recommendations. A chart that reflects the "Cost Per Household" for each scenario is attached to this report. Also included in this report is a breakdown of each of the four categories for each scenario. The categories are: 1. Repair Or Replace Worn Infrastructure. 2. Enterprise Facility Capital Needs. 3. Maintenance And Environmentally Friendly Needs. 4. Additional Park Improvements And Amenities. As you will note, the dollar amount in all three scenarios is the same for categories 1, 2 and 3. The only category that is different in each scenario is category 114. Additional Park Improvements And Amenities." Also included in this report is a copy of "not yet approved" Park Board minutes from their Tuesday, December 12, 1995, Edina Park Board meeting. As you will notice, the Edina Park Board did not make any formal recommendations to raise the proposed bond issue dollar amount at this time. PARK BOND REFERENDA SPECIAL ELECTION DATE To set a special election date for the two proposed park - related bond referenda, staff would recommend that the Edina City Council choose Tuesday, May 7, 1996, as the official date. ACTIVITY CENTER PROPOSAL At the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee meeting on Wednesday, December 5, 1995, it was requested by the committee members to be placed on the Edina Park Board agenda to discuss the possibility of constructing a free - standing multi - generational activities center building. This new free - standing building would be designed to serve primarily the recreation and leisure needs of Edina's senior population, as well as, serve teens and youth populations in the future. The senior citizen population is requesting that a professional study be considered to ascertain the community's needs assessment and level support for an activities center for seniors and youth. Two potential sites were suggested at the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee meeting: 1. Yorktown Park (possibly a joint venture with the YMCA). 2. Lake Cornelia Park. -3- At the Tuesday, December 12, 1995, Edina Park Board meeting, the Edina Park Board discussed the proposal and passed the following motion: THAT WE GET. INPUT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AS TO WHAT TYPE OF DIRECTION THEY WOULD LIKE THE PARK BOARD, THE SENIOR CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE GROUP TO TAKE A LONG LOOK AT WHAT WE NEED TO DO WITH RESPECT TO A MORE PERMANENT SENIOR FACILITY. As you will note in the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee's -proposal-, they are asking the Edina City Council to consider funding a $2,500,000 multi - generational facility. The City of Edina's current lease with the Edina School District to provide space for the Edina Senior Citizen Center is up and the end of the year 2000. PARK BOND ISSUE SCENARIOS SCENARIO #1 SCENARIO #2 SCENARIO #3 REPAIR OR REPLACE WORN INFRASTRUCTURE $1,142,000 $1,142,000 $1,142,000 ENTERPRISE FACILITY CAPITAL NEEDS $2,136,000 $2,136,000 '$2,136,000 MAINTENANCE AND ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY NEEDS $623,000 $623,000 $623,000 ADDITIONAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS AND AMENITIES $999,000 $1,769,000 $2,210,000 TOTAL BOND ISSUE $4,900,000 $5,670,000 $6,111,000 ADDITIONAL PARK IMPROVffi4ENTS AND PARK AMENITIES PARK BOND ISSUE SCENARIOS SCENARIO #1 SCE ARID #2 SCENARIO #3 MULTI - PURPOSE SHELTER BUILDINGS 470,000 620,000 620,000 MISCELLANEOUS PARK AMENITIES 130,000 130,000 130,000 RESTROOM /PICNIC SHELTER BUILDINGS 100,000 150,000 150,000 FORMAL GARDENS /AMENITIES 100,000 100,000 100,000 PARK IDENTIFICATION SIGNS 44,000 44,000 44,000 PICNIC SHELTERS 40,000 30,000 30,000 PATHWAYS 40,000 128,000 150,000 LANDSCAPING (trees, shrubs etc.) 30,000 200,000 200,000 BALLFIELD SAFETY FENCING 20,000 20,000 20,000 PARKING LOTS /CURBING .15,000 55,000 80,000 SECURITY SYSTEM 10,000 10,000 10,000 REGRADE BALLFIELDS AND OPEN AREAS -0- 128,000 128,000 OUTDOOR BASKETBALL COURTS -0- 100,000 100,000 REGULATION SIZE OUTDOOR HOCKEY RINK -0- 35,000 35,000 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM -0- 19,000 19,000 ADULT EXERCISE STATIONS -0- -0- 30,000 BATTING CAGES,. -0- -0- 24,000 MINIATURE OUTDOOR HOCKEY RINKS FOR TODDLERS -0- -0- 40,000 SKATEBOARDING FACILITY -0- -0- 75,000 TENNIS BANGBOARDS -0- -0- 20,000 WADING POOL IN LOCAL PARK -0- -0- 95,000 WINTER TUBE SLIDING HILL -0- -0- 10,000 NEW AMENITIES GRAND TOTAL $999,000 $1,769,000 $2,210,000 TOTAL BOND ISSUE $4,900,000 $5,670,000 $6,111,000 1996 PARK IMPROVEMENT BOND ISSUE SCENARIOS COST PER ' HOUSEHOLD PER YEAR SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO PROPERTY #1 #2 #3 VALUE $4,900,000 $5,670,000 $6,111,000 100,000 11.23 13.03 14.05 160,000 17.97 20.86 22.48 250,000 28.08 32.59 35.12 5001000 56.16 65.17 70.24 * Approximate average household value in Edina. NOTE: Based on 20 year bond issues. J f SCENARIO #1 - $4,900,000 BOND ISSUE REPAIR OR REPLACE WORN INFRASTRUCTURE Playground equipment 520,000 Hard surface courts 112,000 Pathways 145,000 .Tennis courts 901000 Outdoor hockey rinks 56,000 Ball field lighting 50,000 Benches & tables 50,000 Fencing 45,000 _Roof repair 40,000 Furnace replacement 21,000 Drinking fountains 13,000 TOTAL $1,142,000 ENTERPRISE FACILITY CAPITAL NEEDS EDINA AQUATIC CENTER - 1,164,000 ART CENTER - 75,000 GUN RANGE - 134,000 BRAEMAR ARENA - 763,000 TOTAL $2,136,000 MAINTENANCE AND'ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY NEEDS Irrigation 200,000 Curbing & parking lots 120,000 Concrete under benches etc. 100,000 Landscaping 93,000, Asphalt.outdoor hockey rinks 90,000 Sanitary sewer and water for Greenhouse 20,000 TOTAL $623,000 Continuation: SCENARIO #1 - $4,900,000 BOND ISSUE ADDITIONAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS AMID AMENITIES MULTI- PURPOSE SHELTER BUILDINGS Cornelia School Park 150,000 Walnut Ridge Park 150,000 Weber Park 170,000 470,000 MISCELLANEOUS PARK AMENITIES (picnic tables, park benches, signs drinking fountains, grills, trash recepticles and park lighting) All parks RESTROOM /PICNIC SHELTER BUILDINGS Garden Park Wooddale Park FORMAL GARDENS /AMENITIES Arneson Acres Park PARK IDENTIFICATION SIGNS 22 parks PICNIC SHELTERS Braemar Park Pamela Park Todd PATHWAYS (walking paths and bike paths) Highlands Park TREES, SHRUBS AND LANDSCAPING All parks BALLFIELD SAFETY FENCING Nine Park (13 fields) PARKING LOTS /CURBING Arden Park SECURITY SYSTEM (re -core the system) All parks 130,000 130,000 50,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 44,000 44,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 30,000 30,000 20,000 20,000 TOTAL TOTAL BOND ISSUE WOULD BE $4,900,000 15,000 15,000 10,000' 10.000 $999,000 SCENARIO #2 - $5,670,000 BOND ISSUE REPAIR OR REPLACE WORN INFRASTRUCTURE Playground equipment 520,000 Hard surface courts 112,000 Pathways 145,000 Tennis courts 90,000 Outdoor hockey rinks 56,000 Ball field lighting 50,000 Benches & tables 50,000 Fencing 45,000 Roof repair 40,000 Furnace replacement 21,000 Drinking fountains 13,00.0 TOTAL $1,142,000 ENTERPRISE FACILITY CAPITAL NEEDS EDINA AQUATIC CENTER - 1,164,000 ART CENTER - 75,000 GUN RANGE - 1341000 BRAEMAR ARENA - 763,000 TOTAL $2,136,000 MAINTENANCE AND ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY NEEDS Irrigation 200,000 Curbing & parking lots 120,000 Concrete under benches etc. 100,000 Landscaping 93,000 Asphalt outdoor hockey rinks 90,000 Sanitary sewer and water for Greenhouse 20,000 TOTAL $623,000 -2- Continuation: SCENARIO #2 - $5,670,000 BOND ISSUE ADDITIONAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS AND AMENITIES * - New additional amenities added based on community input. MULTI- PURPOSE SHELTER BUILDINGS Cornelia School Park 150,000 Todd Park 150,000* Walnut Ridge Park 150,000 Weber Park 170,000 620,000 LANDSCAPING (TREES, SHRUBS, ETC.) All parks 200,000* 200,000 RESTROOM /PICNIC SHELTER BUILDINGS Garden Park 50,000 Lewis Park 50,000* Wooddale Park 50,000 150,000 MISCELLANEOUS PARK AMENITIES (picnic tables, park benches, signs drinking fountains, grills, trash recepticles and park lighting) All parks 130,000 130,000 REGRADING BALLFIELDS AND OPEN AREAS Braemar Park 50,000* Countryside Park 5,000* McGuire Park .3,000* Pamela Park 30,000* Walnut Ridge Park 40,000* 128,000 PATHWAYS (walking paths, bike paths) Arden Park Kojetin Park Highlands Park Pamela Park Weber Park sidewalks and FORMAL GARDENS /AMENITIES Arneson Acres Park OUTDOOR BASKETBALL COURTS Lewis Park Wooddale Park PARKING LOTS /CURBING 8,000* 5,000* 40,000 40,000 35,000* 128,000 100,000 100,000 50,000* 50,000* 100,000 Arden Park 15,000 Todd Park 20,000* Weber Park 20,000* 55,000 PARK IDENTIFICATION SIGNS 22 parks 44,000 44,000 REGULATION SIZE OUTDOOR HOCKEY RINK Todd Park 35,000* 35,000 PICNIC SHELTERS Braemar Park 20,000 Pamela Park 10,000 30,000 N. -3- Continuation: SCENARIO #2 - $5,670,000 BOND ISSUE BALLFIED SAFETY FENCING Nine Park (13 fields) FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM Tupa Park SECURITY SYSTEMS (re -core the system) All parks VA,6� TOTAL BOND ISSUE WOULD BE $5,6700000 20,000 20,000 19,000* 19,000 10,000 10,000 $10769,000. SCENARIO #3 - $6,111,000 BOND ISSUE REPAIR OR REPLACE WORN INFRASTRUCTURE Playground equipment 520,000 Hard surface courts 112,000 Pathways 145,000 Tennis courts 90,000 Outdoor hockey rinks 56,000 Ball field lighting 50,000 Benches & tables 50,000 Fencing 45,000 Roof repair 40,000 Furnace replacement 21,000 Drinking fountains 13,000 TOTAL $1,142,000 RPRISE FACILITY CAPITAL NEEDS EDINA AQUATIC CENTER - 1,164,000 ART CENTER - 75,000 GUN RANGE - 134,000 BRAEMAR ARENA - 763,000 TOTAL $2,136,000 MAINTENANCE AND ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY NEEDS Irrigation 200,000 Curbing & parking lots 120,000 Concrete under benches etc. 100,000 Landscaping 93,000 Asphalt outdoor hockey rinks 90,000 Sanitary sewer and water for Greenhouse 20,000 TOTAL $623;000 L� -2- Continuation: SCENARIO #3 - $6,111,000 BOND ISSUE * - New additional amenities.added based on results of 1988 Public Opinion Survey and staff recommendations. ADDITIONAL PARK IMPROVENEWS AMID AMENITIES MULTI - PURPOSE SHELTER BUILDINGS Cornelia School Park Todd Park Walnut Ridge Park Weber Park LANDSCAPING (TREES, SHRUBS, ETC.) All parks 150,000 150,000 150,000 170,000 620,000 200,000 200,000 RESTROOM /PICNIC SHELTER BUILDINGS Garden Park 50,000 Lewis Park 50,000 Wooddale Park 50,000 150,000 PATHWAYS (walking paths and bike paths) Arden Park 8,000 Birchcrest Park 2,000* Braemar Park 10,000* Countryside Park 15,000* Garden Park 5,000* Highlands Park 40,000 Kojetin Park 5,000 McGuire Park 5,000* Pamela Park 40,000 Strachauer Park 5,000* Tingdale Park 5,000* Weber Park 35,000 150,000 PARKING LOTS /CURBING Arden Park 15,000 Todd Park 20,000 Pamela Park 25,000* Weber Park 20,000 80,000 FORMAL GARDENS /AMENITIES Arneson Acres Park 100,000 100,000 PARK IDENTIFICATION SIGNS 22 parks 44,000 44,000 SECURITY SYSTEM (re -core the system) All parks 10,000 10,000 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS Tupa Park 19,000 19,000 BALLFIED SAFETY FENCING Nine Park (13 fields)- 20,000 20,000 OUTDOOR BASKETBALL COURTS Lewis Park 50,000 Wooddale Park 501000 100,000 -3 -. Continuation: SCENARIO #3 - $6,111,000 BOND ISSUE TENNIS BANGBOARDS, Lewis Park 10,000* - Pamela Park 10,000* 20,000 PICNIC SHELTERS Braemar Park Pamela Park ADULT EXERCISE STATIONS Lake Cornelia Park BATTING CAGES Braemar Park Van Valkenburg Park WADING POOL IN A LOCAL PARK Site to be determined SKATE BOARDING FACILITY 20,000 10,000 30,000 30,000* 30,000 12,000* 12,000* 24,000 95,000* Site to be determined 75,000* TUBE SLIDING HILL Braemar Park 10,000* REGULATION SIZE OUTDOOR HOCKEY RINK Todd Park 35,000 OUTDOOR BASKETBALL COURTS Lewis Park 50,000 Wooddale Park 50,000 OUTDOOR HOCKEY RINKS FOR TODDLERS Cornelia School-Park 20,000* Walnut Ridge Park 20,000* REGRADING BALLFIELDS AND OPEN AREAS Braemar Park 50,000 Countryside Park 5,000 McGuire Park 3,000 Pamela Park 30,000 Walnut Ridge Park 40,000 MISCELLANEOUS PARK AMENITIES (picnic tables, park benches, signs drinking fountains, grills, trash recepticles and park lighting) 95,000 75,000 10,000 35,000 100,000 40,000 128,000 All parks 130,000 130,000 TOTAL $2,210,000 TOTAL BOND ISSUE WOULD BE $6,111,000 EDINA PARK BOARD 7:30 p.m. December 12, 1995 MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Dave Crowther, John Dovolis, Jim Fee, Beth Hall, Andrew Montgomery, Jean Rydell, Becky Bennett, Bill Jenkins, Mike Burley, Andrew Herring, Frank Bennett John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, Susan Weigle OTHERS PRESENT: Marjorie Ruedy, Burton Ruedy, Jane Michael, Allen Carlson, Lori Carlson, Bob Kojetin, Charlotte Burrell, Gloria Cunningham, Lila Larson, Harold Larson, Helen Honmyhr, Catherine Mulholland, Carl Carlson I. APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 14, 1995 MINUTES Jean Rydell MOVED TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 14, 1995 MINUTES. Beth Hall SECONDED THE MOTION. Minutes Approved. II. COMMUNITY INPUT TOWN MEETING (ALL PARKS INCLUDED) Mr. Keprios showed the slide presentation to the audience. Mr. Montgomery asked if anyone in the audience had any questions regarding the slide presentation or bond referendum. Jane Michael noted that the presentation is superb, however, she is interested in the number of kids who use the facilities because the slide presentation did not show the number of kids that are packed into the facilities. She pointed out that she has been using these facilities for the last 30 years and they are crowded. Mr. Keprios explained that there are statistics on all scheduled activities as well as all season tickets sold and daily admissions sold. However, they are not funded to monitor the unscheduled leisure use at the local parks. Mr. Keprios pointed out that in 1988 a survey was done regarding the park system and there are figures available on how often people use the parks. He noted that the survey shows approximately 90% of the people who live in the city at some point in a years time use the park system, which indicates they are heavily used. Al Carlson indicated that he was unable to attend the Todd Park meeting, however, it looks like a small price to pay for what they are getting and he is looking forward to it. Burt Ruedy indicated that he and his wife have adopted Todd Park and therefore spend a lot of time working at the park. He stated that he sees a lot of small children and their mothers using the facility which is in great need of improvement and he is very glad to see this undertaking. Mr. Keprios stated that a large section of the population from the Todd Park meeting felt strongly that they would like a shelter building and hockey rink. However, it was clear that a smaller section of the population indicated they would rather see pathways and a picnic shelter. Mr. Keprios pointed out that there was a lot of good input from all of the residents. He stated that clearly the message from the Todd Park area residents was they need new playground equipment, they need to update the tennis courts and they no longer want adult activities scheduled at the park, they would rather see youth activities scheduled there. Mr. Keprios explained that the staff's response was we would be happy to do that, however, there is safety concern with regards to scheduling youth vs. adults at the park. He noted that the adults are more safety conscious than are children when they are limited to just on street parking. Mr. Keprios also indicated that the City of Edina owns the house that is on park property at Todd Park and it will be coming down August 1, 1996. He noted that the current plan is to seed or sod the vacated area until we see what the outcome of the bond issue is and then possibly have a task force work on a plan that may include the addition of a parking lot. Mr. Montgomery asked Mr. Keprios to share with audience how many dollars the Park Department has available in the normal budget process. Mr. Keprios explained that in a years time the City Council allocates $180,000 a year for a capital plan for all 39 parks. However, the revenue facilities have to generate their own capital. They are in charge of that responsibility and some of them can not make it because they are also responsible to pay off their own operating expense and debt payment. Mr. Keprios informed the audience that if they have any further comments to send them to him in writing because he passes everything on to the Park Board and City Council. Mr. Dovolis indicated that he would like to commend the staff for the excellent job they are doing with the presentation of the slide show and the community meetings. He has heard nothing but positive input. Mr. Fee noted that everything has been well done. Mr. Keprios stated that a lot of credit is due to Dave Crowther who showed up at all of the meetings and was very helpful. He noted that he appreciated him taking the time to be at those meetings. 2 Mr. Montgomery asked if the general feeling has been all positive so far. Mr. Keprios answered that the majority have beeri.much like we just heard, however, people obviously have special concerns within their own particular parks. III. ACTIVITY CENTER PROPOSAL Lila Larson handed out the proposal to the Park Board and noted that it is presented for the sole purpose of developing a strategy to facilitate the construction of a multi - purpose building to house the Edina Senior Center. Ms. Larson indicated that the Senior Center Advisory Council would like to "piggy back" a request for funds on the recently approved bond referendum. She noted that the Edina Senior Center Advisory Council proposes that funding in the amount of $2.5 million be set aside for the construction of a free - standing Senior Center building. She indicated that everything she was going to say is listed in the proposal. Ms. Larson explained that there are two pieces of property that the City already owns where they would like to possibly see a free standing Senior Center be built. She noted one is at Lake Cornelia Park and other is on York Avenue. Ms. Larson pointed out there are undoubtedly more than 9,000 senior citizens in Edina and the Senior Center has less than 1,500 paid members. Ms. Larson indicated there are multiple reasons for why they would like to have a free standing building much like other communities in the area do. Ms. Larson stated that a lot of the surrounding communities pay more attention to transportation to get their people to the center where Edina has no transportation. Ms. Larson noted that the current Senior Center has all the warmth and charm of an old. high school building. Mr. Keprios indicated that he met with the Advisory Council last Wednesday and noted that it was a very positive discussion and he received some really good feedback. Mr. Keprios stated that Mr. Hughes, Assistant City Manger, is the chair of the YMCA Board and is warm to the thought of possibly a joint venture at the YMCA. He explained that the YMCA is refocusing their vision on the populations that they are targeting and one of which is seniors and the other target age group is the 10 to 14 year olds. He indicated that the YMCA may be interested in a possible joint venture at the Yorktown YMCA site. Mr. Keprios suggested that maybe we could work a deal to add on to their facility through some other creative funding that wouldn't necessarily have to involve this particular bond issue, however, a needs assessment should be done first. This is one possible option. Ms. Larson noted that she is sure there are other options. She explained how she recently attended a one day seminar on inter- generational dynamics and she has found out there are a lot of creative things we could be doing. Mr. Montgomery asked if this item can be "piggy backed" on the referendum 3 at this stage. Mr. Keprios replied that anything is possible, however, it is a little late in the game but if it is something you would like the City Council to consider you can recommend it to them. Mr. Montgomery asked Mr. Keprios where he would visualize a free standing Senior Center at Lake Cornelia. Mr. Keprios replied they are considering where the sand volleyball courts are now and that they would have to somewhat expand the parking lot. Mr. Montgomery asked what kind of a footprint is being talked about and Mr. Keprios indicated that they are currently talking about a 10,000 square foot facility. Currently the Senior Center has 7,040 square feet. Mr. Fee asked what would a facility like this cost and Mr. Keprios indicated that he doesn't think it would 'cost 2.5 million. We noted it would probably be approximately $100 a square foot, however, it also depends on the type of facility that is being built. Mr. Fee asked what's the implication of the five year lease with the Community Center. Mr. Keprios explained that part of the stipulation when they renew the lease for another five years beginning January 1, 2001 is they will charge us over $17,000 a year in today's dollars for the cost of maintenance and upkeep. Mr. Keprios stated that in all honesty that isn't reason enough to go out and build our own facility in a hurry. He indicated that it's actually a pretty good deal as far as operational expenses. Mr. Keprios pointed out that we would most definitely incur an awful lot more than that if we owned our own facility and had to maintain our own heat, light, power, janitor, etc. Ms. Bennett asked if at this point _we aren't charged anything. Mr. Keprios indicated that the way the first contract was written is we would not pay anything. It was noted that the City used CDBG Amoney to put in the elevator and the City of Edina put in an additional 5100,000 to upgrade the third floor. He also pointed out that Community Education does use the Senior Center area for, some of their programs. Mr. Montgomery asked if the Fire Department would take over the tennis court location at Yorktown Park and a Senior Center would take over the softball field location at Yorktown Park. Mr. Keprios stated that that is very likely. He indicated that this is actually an ideal site because it's where the majority of the senior population is located. However, as far as aesthetics, Lake Cornelia is a more beautiful site. Mr. Montgomery indicated that he has a problem identifying a 100 ft. by 100 ft. footprint in Lake Cornelia with all of the other things that are there. Ms. Michael asked the Park Board if they would embrace the concept rather than just table it or put it aside. Mr. Montgomery stated that he thinks the Park Board needs to digest this a little bit. He noted that at this time without a presentation he would assume that the Park Board would have to have some more information before it can be brought before the City Council for any kind of recommendation. Mr. Montgomery explained that he has been 4 on the Park Board for a while and the Senior Center is something where a lot of time has been spent trying to improve it. He noted that he thinks it's better now, but obviously it certainly can be even better when you compare us to what other communities have to offer. Ms. Michael asked if there is anything the Park Board would like the seniors to do as a group to help the Park Board better understand where we are coming from. Mr. Keprios pointed out that Jane Michael is a very active volunteer in that she serves on the Referendum Team appointed by the Mayor and also serves on the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee. Mr. Crowther asked if they could get a better understanding of where the 2.5 million dollar figure came from. Ms. Larson,noted it's a starting figure. Mr. Crowther asked what is going to come from the $2.5 million and how was the number arrived at. Ms. Larson indicated that right now it's strictly an estimate but she's hoping that it not only covers the facility but some of the basic furnishings. She noted that it could be a larger number or it could be a smaller number, she doesn't know what it's going to be. Mr. Keprios pointed out that it all depends on what everyone wants the facility to be in order to come up with a figure. He stated that there is obviously a lot of leg work that needs to be done and if the Park Board and City Council want to embrace this concept, he would be more than happy to do the necessary research. Ms. Bennett asked what are some of things that other communities have for their senior citizens. Ms. Larson indicated that her husband has been going around taking pictures of the free standing Senior. Centers in the .area. She noted that most of them are larger and more extensive than ours and the biggest thing they seem to have which Edina does not is transportation. Ms. Larson pointed out that you walk into any of these centers and they are swarming with people. She stated that at the Edina Senior Center they have two men who are usually at the pool table where you can hardly get on a pool table at Bloomington. Ms. Larson commented that what they do have is well done and that they couldn't ask for a better Director than Susan Weigle. Ms. Larson pointed out that, if it wasn't for Susan, the place would be awful. She stated that when you are up there alone the place is spooky. Ms. Larson also indicated that she recently had knee surgery and. pointed out that it's a long way up to the Senior Center and that it has so many drawbacks. It was asked if Edina has some sort of transportation and Mr. Keprios indicated that we do have a senior bus, however, it is not used to transport people to the Senior Center. It's basically used to get people to their doctor appointments and the grocery store. Ms. Larson pointed out that the drivers are volunteer drivers. Mr. Fee asked Ms. Larson what they envision as far 5 as transportation, would they want to see the seniors picked up at their homes or at different locations. Ms. Larson replied that she's not real sure, however, she would think they would be picked uR at home and have it work similar to the Metro Mobility program. Mr. Montgomery asked if most seniors live in a condo or in their own individual home. It was noted the majority of them are in their own homes. Charlotte Burrell indicated that she is also on the Senior Citizen Advisory Council and pointed out that the trend is they are trying to keep people out of nursing homes. Therefore, they are going to get more and more people coming to the senior centers and she feels we need to plan ahead because the senior population has really increased. Mr. Fee asked if the Park Board should get some sort of direction from the City Council as to possibly formulating a joint venture committee with the Park Board, seniors and whoever else they feel would be appropriate. Mr. Dovolis noted that he embraces the idea of having a joint venture with the seniors and Park Board so there is some discussion and we all know what we are talking about. Mr. Fee MOVED THAT WE GET INPUT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AS TO WHAT TYPE OF DIRECTION THEY WOULD LIKE THE PARK BOARD, THE SENIOR CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE GROUP TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT WE NEED TO DO WITH RESPECT TO A MORE PERMANENT SENIOR FACILITY. John Dovolis SECONDED THE MOTION. Ms. Rydell explained that, when the Senior Center lost their lease on the high rise and had to find an alternative location, the City Council had limited options in determining where the Senior Center could be located. She noted that the Community Center was basically the only available spot at that time. Mr. Fee stated that he would recommend that the Park Board give the City Council the proposal from the Edina Senior Advisory Council and that they then give us some type of direction as to how we should proceed in reviewing alternatives. Mr. Dovolis asked Mr. Keprios if he would work with the senior citizens and see what other communities are doing and what other facilities are available to seniors in the surrounding communities. Mr. Fee indicated that he is sure the City Council will tell us to put a task force together which will have this type of information. Carl Carlson pointed out to the Park Board how vitally important the seniors are to the success of the bond issue. He noted that seniors are the voters who go out and vote and represent a rather high proportion of the voting population in all communities. He explained that he feels the success or 0 failure of the bond issue depends a great deal on the seniors. Mr. Fee explained that the Park Board is in favor of helping the seniors, however, some direction is needed fro_ m the City Council because the Park Board is strictly an advisory body. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. IV. FORESTRY Mr. Dovolis indicated he had a question regarding the Forestry Department. He asked if the City of Edina does anything with injections to save trees. Mr. Keprios explained that where it's helpful for the prevention or transfer of Oak Wilt they have tried it. He noted that we have a contract with Kunde Tree Company and they will either use the vibrating plow or some injection, it's up to their professional recommendation. Mr. Dovolis stated that he thinks it's been proved over the years that it does help. IV. PARK BOND REFERENDA RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL Mr. Montgomery asked if there is any organized opposition to the referendum and Mr. Keprios indicated there is not at this time. Mr. Fee asked if there were any comments regarding the third hockey rink. Mr. Crowther indicated that to summarize what he heard at the meetings is there was almost no comment on it. He noted that a few of the older folks commented on the hockey portion of the referendum and their questions where generally probing at why don't these things make enough money to pay for themselves. He noted that generally people were in favor of it or didn't express an opinion. However, the bulk of the discussions were approximately 95% about the specific parks and what each park was going to get. Mr. Crowther pointed out that there is definitely a desire to have permanent restrooms as opposed to satellites. Also, everyone is concerned about parking in the neighborhood parks. Mr. Crowther also noted that everyone wants a hockey rink and are in favor of paving the hockey rinks so they have a place for in -line skating. Mr. Keprios indicated that another common question was how did we get to where we need to have to borrow money to replace worn infrastructure. Mr. Crowther explained that at the meetings people first wanted their own individual desires. However, they then looked at the bigger picture and said why don't we do a bigger referendum and do it right as opposed to skimping. They feel it's not going to all get done with the current dollars that are allocated. Also, there was a real concern about the maintenance and if we put all of this money in are we going to be sure that we maintain it. Mr. Crowther noted there were quite a few criticisms at all of the meetings about the overall maintenance of the parks. He indicated that they 7 had to explain to the people that we don't have the staff and money. He indicated that it's hard for people to buy into the deal and if they vote for more money they want to make sure that everything is going to get maintained. Also, people are concerned about how everything is going to get prioritized as to what gets done first, second, third etc. Mr. Fee asked what is the period of time on this. Mr. Keprios replied that he talked with the City Attorney and was told there is no law on the books that says you have a limited amount of time if you use "due diligence." In other words, if you can prove you are making progress and not using it to make money there is no law that governs that. However, Mr. Keprios noted that he hopes the job can get done in three years or less. Mr. Crowther asked if there was any way a senior center could be tied in the three sheet of ice at Braemar. Mr. Keprios indicated that probably not because it would be the furthest location from the majority of the senior population. Mr. Keprios indicated that he will be showing the slide show the School District administrative staff on Tuesday, January 9th because they have asked to see it. He noted that he will also be showing the slide show to the City Council on Tuesday, December 19th. Mr. Keprios stated that some of the things that people said at the meetings were if we don't get our requested additions, we are not voting for it. Mr. Dovolis noted that the phone calls he received basically indicated that we are not doing enough. Mr. Crowther explained that Mr. Keprios addressed this topic at the various meetings and when people asked why is it so bad, he asked them if they have ever been to a Truth -In- Taxation meeting. "Have you ever asked the City Council to increase your taxes so that we can improve the maintenance of our parks ?" He stated that many people just don't understand the process. People seem to rely on staff to be their advocates for what is needed in the park system. Mr. Crowther pointed out that the Park Board could recommend to the City Council that we increase the amount, however, he doesn't have a clue what the number should be. However,. there is no question that there is a solid group of people who would be in favor of doing more as opposed to less. Ms. Bennett indicated that it might be a mistake to not ask for more because we won't get a second chance for quite awhile. Mr. Dovolis indicated that the last one was 40 years ago. Mr. Crowther noted that out of the 4.9 million we may only get 4.6 million because all of the expenses have to come out of it. Mr. Keprios indicated that he just talked to the City Attorney and was told that if they approve the 4.9 million, the City Council has the authority to raise the issue another 2% 91 to pay for the expenses such as sale of the bonds and election costs. Mr. Montgomery stated that it seems to him that the Park Board feels that $4.9 million is slight and asked how that might be changed. Mr. Keprios indicated that his initial recommendation was slightly more than $5.3 million and the City Council decided long ago that their comfort zone at that time was $4.9 million. Mr. Fee noted if they change the amount from $4.9 million now that it's been published it may backfire. Mr. Crowther suggested that possibly the better message would be that we realize that $4.9 million is light, however, why don't we look at how we are going to up our ongoing dollars for maintenance so that we can keep everything up to standard. Mr. Dovolis indicated that money should be set aside a certain degree for improvements to parks and infrastructure of the parks. Mr. Fee explained that he has talked with the Mayor about that issue and he will attend one of the Park Board meetings to explain the City Council's philosophy on this. VI. OTHER A. University of Minnesota Grant - Mr. Keprios indicated that the University of Minnesota is going to be offering us a $19,000 grant to staff a person to work toward our turf management plan and further study it. He noted that person will make recommendations and set up test sites. Mr. Keprios explained that the grant will be coming in written form within the next few weeks for the City Council's approval and he will be passing that on to the Park Board and City Council when he receives it. B. Athletic Programs - Mr. Montgomery asked if all of the winter athletic programs are going along okay. It was noted that all is well and that Centennial Lakes opens for public skating on December 15th and the other 11 outdoor skating sites will be opening on December 16th. C. Dog Sled Rides - Mr. MacHolda stated that on December 26th at the Braemar Golf Course driving range there will be dog sled rides from 9:30 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. He indicated there were 80 tickets and it was noted that there are no more tickets available. D. Arena Ice Fees - Mr. Crowther thanked Mr. Keprios for sending the Park Board the information on the ice rates. He noted he was happy to see Edina is very much right in the ball park and the Park Board shouldn't waste time worrying about the rates when staff recommends them. He stated that staff does their homework and we should buy into that. Mr. Keprios thanked Mr. Crowther for the comment and replied that staff will do a better job next year in providing the Park Board with surveys pertaining to fees and charges. In addition, all Park and Recreation Department management staff will be present during adoption of fees and charges. Vol VII. ADJOURNMENT Dave Crowther MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:15 P.M. Jean Rydell SECONDED THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED. 10 December 12, 1995 Edina Senior Center Advisory Council PROPOSAL to the Edina Park Board This proposal is presented for the sole purpose of developing a strategy to facilitate the construction of a multi - purpose building to house the Edina Senior Center. The Senior Center Advisory Council would like to "piggy back" a request for funds on the recently approved bond referendum. This referendum asks for funds to be used to refurbish Edina's park facilities and build a third indoor ice rink. The Edina Senior Center Advisory Council proposes that funding in the amount of $2.5 million be set aside for the construction of a free - standing Senior Center building. MISSION OF THE EDINA SENIOR CENTER The mission of the Senior Center is to provide needed services to all Edina residents 55 years or older, with emphasis on recreational, health, social services, and educational programs. The Advisory Council feels that this mission is not being accomplished, primarily because of the lack of a free - standing building. On the positive side, we do have accommodations on the third floor of the Edina Community Center. Our staff works extremely well even with the previously mentioned limitations. We do have many successful programs: Performing tap group Performing singing group Trips and tours Card groups Bowling league Golf league Men's softball league Men's volleyball Line dancing Computer interest group Spelling interest group Book club Sports activities are not held at the Senior Center. The above is just a cross - section of the Center's activities. At present, we have a membership of 1,498. Figures from the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency show that Edina has 9,386 seniors (as of 1989); 16% are members of the Center. It is reasonable to assume that some of 9,386 senior citizens do not belong for reasons of their own, but we believe that we have not reached -a larger number of this population because of the lack of transportation and poor parking arrangements. REGARDING THE BUILDING The Advisory Council envisions a two story multi - purpose building constructed with the potential for expansion. The building would be occupied primarily by the Senior Center. Evening and weekend hours could be filled by youth activities, adult education, intramural sports or other activities. Additional tenants could also occupy the building -- possibly the Park &_ Recreation department or a day care center. Potential sites for the proposed building are: 1. Land owned by the City of Edina adjacent to the Aquatic Center 2. Land owned by the City of Edina north of the York Avenue YMCA We are going far afield with ideas, but if we wish to appeal to a large segment of the voters, the concept would have to be for all users and USERS ARE TAXPAYERS. 1995 -1996 Edina Senior Center members are listed below: Charlotte Burrell Carl Carlson Gloria Cunningham Helen Honmyhr Harold Larson Lila Larson, chairperson Jane Michael Gwen Mosborg Catherine Mulholland, co- chairperson Doris Westergren REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: DEBRA MANGEN CITY CLERK DATE: DECEMBER 28, 1995 SUBJECT: RESOLUTIONS DESIGNATING DIRECTOR/ALTERNATE FOR SRA AND LOGIS Recommendation: Agenda Item # W.B.C. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA 0 To Council Action ❑ Motion 0 Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Adopt resolutions designating Director /Alternate Director of the Suburban Rate Authority and LOGIS for 1996. Info /Background: Attached are copies of resolution which the Council should approve at the first meeting in January each year. There have been no changes from the previous year. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: John C. Wallin is hereby designated to serve as a Director of the Suburban Rate Authority, and Eric R. Anderson is hereby designated to serve as Alternate Director of the Suburban Rate Authority for the year 1996 and until their successors are appointed. 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 January 2, 1996, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 3rd day of January, 1996. City Clerk RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO LOGIS BE�IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: John C. Wallin is hereby designated as a Director of LOGIS and Kenneth E. Rosland is hereby designated as Alternate Director of LOGIS for the year 1996 and until their successors are appointed. 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 January 2, 1996, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 3rd day of January, 1996. City Clerk REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: DEBRA MANGEN CITY CLERK DATE: DECEMBER 28, 1995 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER Recommendation: Agenda Item # IV.D. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ❑ Motion ❑X Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Adopt resolution designating official newspaper for 1996. Info /Background: Attached is a copy of a resolution that the Council should approve at the first meeting in January each year. This year the Sun - Current has notified us of a rate increase from $1.02 per line for the first insertion of each legal publication to $1.09 per line. The subsequent insertion rate increased from $0.51 per line to $0.55 per line. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the Edina Sun - Current be and is hereby designated as the Official Newspaper for the City of Edina for the year 1996. 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 January 2, 1996, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 3rd day of January, 1996. City Clerk REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: DEBRA MANGEN CITY CLERK DATE: DECEMBER 28, 1995 SUBJECT: - SIGNATORY RESOLUTION Recommendation: Agenda Item # IV.E. Consent ID Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA 0 To Council Action ❑ Motion X❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Adopt signatory resolution authorizing the Mayor, Manager and Treasurer of the City to act in the transaction of banking business. Info /Background: At the first regular Council Meeting of the year the Council should adopt a signatory resolution that authorizes persons holding office as Mayor, Manager and Treasurer of the City to act for the City in the transaction of banking business with the City's named banks. A copy of the. recommended resolution is attached for your review. SIGNATORY RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the persons holding office as Mayor, Manager and Treasurer of the City of Edina, be, and-they hereby are authorized to act for this municipality in the transaction of any banking business with First Bank National Association, Americana State Bank of Edina, Fidelity Bank, Norwest Bank Minnesota NA, Richfield Bank and Trust, Co. and National City Bank/Southdale Office (hereinafter referred to as the "Bank") from time to time and until written notice to any Bank to the contrary, to sign checks against said accounts, which checks will be signed by the Mayor, Manager and City Treasurer. Each Bank is hereby authorized and directed to honor and pay any checks against such accounts if signed as above described, whether or not said check is payable to the order of, or deposited to the credit of, any officer or officers of the City, including the signer or signers of the check. Adopted this 2nd day of January, 1996. 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 January 2, 1996, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 3rd day of January, 1996. City Clerk REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: DEBRA MANGEN CITY CLERK Agenda Item # IV.F. Consent Information Only ❑ DATE: DECEMBER 28, 1995 El To HRA Mgr: Recommends SUBJECT: FACSIMILE SIGNATURES RESOLUTION Recommendation: ❑X To Council Action ❑ Motion ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Adopt resolution authorizing the use of facsimile signatures by public officials of the City of Edina. Info /Background: At the first regular Council Meeting of the year the Council should adopt a resolution authorizing the use of facsimile signatures by the Mayor, Manager and Treasurer on checks, drafts, warrants, vouchers, etc., or other orders of public funds deposited with the City's banks. A copy of the recommended resolution is attached for your review. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE USE OF FACSIMILE SIGNATURES BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the use of facsimile signatures by the following named persons: FREDERICK S. RICHARDS - Mayor KENNETH E. ROSLAND - City Manager JOHN C. WALLIN - Treasurer on checks, drafts, warrants, warrant - checks, vouchers or other orders of public funds deposited in First Bank National Association, Americana State Bank of Edina, Fidelity Bank, Norwest Bank Minnesota NA, Richfield Bank and Trust, Co. and National City Bank/Southdale Office, be and hereby is approved, and that each of said persons may authorize said depository banks to honor any such instrument bearing his facsimile signature in such form as he may designate and to charge the same to the account in said depository bank upon which drawn as fully as though it bore his manually written signature and that instruments so honored shall be wholly operative and binding in favor of said depository bank although such facsimile signature shall have been affixed without his authority. Adopted this 2nd day of January, 1996. 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 January 2, 1996, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 3rd day of January, 1996. City Clerk REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: DEBRA MANGEN CITY CLERK DATE: DECEMBER 28, 1995 SUBJECT: DEPOSITORIES FOR CITY FUNDS Recommendation: Agenda Item # IV.G. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA 0 To Council Action ❑ Motion 0 Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Adopt resolution designating depositories for public funds of the City of Edina. Info /Background: At the first regular Council Meeting of the year the Council should adopt a resolution designating official depositories for public funds of the City. Attached is a copy of the resolution indicating the recommended depositories. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the First Bank National Association, Americana State Bank of Edina, Fidelity Bank, Edina, MN, Norwest Bank Minnesota NA, Edina, MN, and Richfield Bank and Trust, Co., authorized to do banking business in Minnesota, be and hereby are designated as Official Depositories for the Public Funds of the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, until January 1, 1997. Adopted this 2nd day of January, 1996. 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 January 2, 1996, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 3rd day of January, 1996. City Clerk REPORUREC OMMENDATION TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: DEBRA MANGEN CITY CLERK Agenda Item # IV.H. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ DATE: DECEMBER 28, 1995 El To HRA Mgr. Recommends SUBJECT: DEPOSITORY RESOLUTION FOR NATIONAL CITY BANK Recommendation: x❑ To Council Action ❑ Motion El Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Adopt resolution designating National City Bank as a depository for public funds of the City of Edina. Info /Background: At the first regular Council Meeting of the year the Council should adopt a resolution designating official depository for public funds of the City. Last year Jerry Gilligan prepared a memorandum regarding the designation of National City Bank as a Depository of City , Funds. I have attached copies of that memorandum and the recommended resolution for Council review. Staff recommends National City Bank as an official depository for public funds. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DEPOSITORY BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the National City Bank/Southdale Office, Edina, Minnesota, authorized to do banking business in Minnesota, be and hereby is designated as an Official Depository for the Public Funds of the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, until January 1, 1997. Adopted this 2nd day of January, 1996. 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 January 2, 1996, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 3rd day of January, 1996. City Clerk s MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Kenneth Rosland, City Manager FROM: Jerry Gilligan DATE: December 21, 1994 RE: Designation of National City Bank as Depository of City Funds At its meeting on January 3, 1995 the City Council will be requested to designate banks to act as the depositories of City funds for 1995. Councilmember Elect Maetzold is an officer of National City Bank /Southdale, which is one of the banks proposed for designation as a depository. The City is presently using National City Bank as a depository. Minnesota law contains an exception for the designation of banks as depository of public funds from the conflict of interest prohibition contained in Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.87. This exception is contained in Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.88, subdivisions 1 and 2, and permits the City to designate a bank in which a Councilmember is interested as a depository of City funds if the following conditions are met: 1. The interested Councilmember makes a disclosure that he is a director or employee of the bank and this disclosure is entered on the minutes of the Council meeting; 2. The disclosure is made when the bank is first designated as depository or when the Councilmember is elected, whichever is later; and 3. The designation of the bank as a depository is approved by unanimous vote. As noted above, the designation of the depository is required to be by unanimous vote. Since the language in the statute requiring a unanimous vote does not contain the additional phrase "by all members of the council" as is used in certain other instances in Minnesota law when referencing a vote by the Council (i.e. two - thirds vote of all members is required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355 for approval of comprehensive plan amendments and is required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357 to approve a rezoning), I would interpret this provision to require a unanimous vote by all members voting on the question. DORSEY & WHITNEY A PAazHCvmR Iwn.uoum Plarz=Kw -%L AntPn*ATKwm Therefore, I would recommend that when the question of designation of National City Bank as a depository is considered Councilmember Maetzold make a statement at that time disclosing his relationship with National City_ .Bank then abstain from voting on the question. Because of the special requirements required to be followed in considering the designation of National City Bank as a depository, the City Council should consider this designation separately from the designation of other banks as depositories. JPG:cmn -2- DoRsEY &- WHITNEY A FAM"F" GI INC"DING IYWWUMMXN LC.OWOt1 "Ma r� r�. REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: GORDON HUGHES DATE: JANUARY 2, 1996 SUBJECT: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERMENT POLICY Recommendation: Adopt attached policy. Info /Background: Agenda Item # I y • 1 Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA 0 To Council Action ❑ Motion 0 Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion In 1977, the City Council adopted a Special Assessment Deferment Policy pursuant to State Law. This policy permit homeowners, age 65 or older, to defer special assessments provided that the homeowner met a two part test: 1. The total household income of the homeowner could not exceed $15,000.00 per year, and 2. The first year's installment of the special assessment, either alone or when combined with other special assessments, must exceed 2% of the total household income. The period of deferment is indefinite, but according to law terminates: 1. Upon the death of the owner, 2. Upon the sale or transfer of the property, REPORT /RECOMMENDATION - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERMENT POLICY January 2, 1996 . Page two 3. Upon the loss of the homestead status of the property, or 4. Whenever the City determines that a hardship no longer exists. We have determined that the deferment policy has not been updated since its inception in 1977. In particular, the $15,000 income limit has not been increased and therefore, in relative terms, fewer and fewer individuals are able to qualify for the deferment. After reviewing the intent of the policy, we believe that a fixed income limit could be eliminated altogether by virtue of the fact that only assessments exceeding two percent of an individual's income are eligible for deferment. This "2 %" criteria effectively restricts the incomes that can qualify for the deferment. The attached deferment policy eliminates the fixed income requirement and also incorporates other technical modifications to the policy. We recommend adoption of the updated policy. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 435.193 through 435.195, the City is authorized and empowered to defer the payment of special assessments against homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older or retired by virtue of a permanent and total disability for whom payment of such special assessment would be a hardship; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina deems it desirable and in the best interests of. the City of Edina and its citizens to implement such authority and power by establishing standards, guidelines and procedures for the granting and processing of such deferments; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the following standards, guidelines and procedures are hereby established and adopted: ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS • The applicant must be 65 years of age or older or retired by virtue of a permanent and total disability, and • The applicant must own the property for which deferment is requested, either alone or in joint tenancy with a spouse who also lives with the applicant in the same property, but who needs not be 65 years of age or older or permanently and totally disabled, and • The property for which deferment is requested must be classified and taxed as homestead property by the City Assessor as of the date the application for deferment is made, and • The first year's installment of the proposed special assessment must, either alone or in the aggregate with installments of other special assessments due against the property and payable in the first year of the proposed assessment, total more than two percent of the applicant's total household income as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 290A. INTEREST RATE Any special assessment deferred pursuant to this policy shall bear interest at the rate of one(1) percentage point in excess of the rate of interest charged on the special assessment had it not been deferred, but not, however, in excess of the maximum rate permitted by law. PROCEDURES The applicant for deferment must file a completed application and affadavit with the City Assessor prior to the day the City is required to certify the first year's installment of the special assessment to Hennepin County for collection with the following year's taxes. All applications for deferment shall be made on forms prepared and supplied by Hennepin County and the City of Edina. The City Assessor shall include in any and all mailed notices of public hearings with respect to special assessments, a statement explaining the deferment policy hereby adopted. The City Assessor shall transmit all deferments granted pursuant to this policy to the Hennepin County Auditor for recording with the Office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota, so as to give notice of such deferment to all future owners and encumbrancers of the property for which a deferment has been granted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council shall not be prohibited from determining that a hardship exists, and that a deferment should be granted on the above terms and conditions, even if the eligibility requirements are not met by an applicant, provided that the Council finds that: There are exceptional and unusual circumstances not covered by the foregoing standards and guidelines, and If granted, the deferment will have made in a non - discriminatory manner, and The granting of the deferment will not give the applicant an unreasonable preference over other applicants. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that failure of the City to give notice pursuant to this policy or the granting or denial of any deferment shall not invalidate any special assessment otherwise made and levied by the City of Edina pursuant to applicable statutory requirements. Revised 12 -27 -95 "A REPORURECOMMENDATION TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: GORDON L. HUGHES DATE: JANUARY 2,1996 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR SALE OF TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS - SERIES 1996A Recommendation: Adopt.the attached resolution. Report: Agenda Item # IX.A. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ❑ To Council Action ❑ Motion Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion At the November 20, 1995, meeting, the City Council authorized staff to, proceed with the steps necessary to refund the 1988 and 1989 General Obligation Taxable Bonds which were issued for the Centennial Lakes project. Staff has worked with Springsted, Inc., to prepare the attached resolution and Terms of Proposal with respect to this refunding. We recommend that the Council adopt the attached resolution thereby setting a sale date for February 5, 1996. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR THE SALE OF TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1996A BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Edina, Minnesota (the City), as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The City presently has outstanding its General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1988, dated as of October 1, 1988, and its General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989, dated as of April 1, 1989. To refund a portion of such tax increment bonds it is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to issue its Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 1996A (the Bonds), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and Section 469.178. Section 2. Terms of Proposal. Springsted Incorporated, financial consultant to the City, has presented to this Council a form of Terms of Proposal for sale of the Bonds, which is attached hereto and hereby approved and shall be placed on file with the City Clerk. Each and all of the provisions of the Terms of Proposal are hereby adopted as the terms and conditions of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Springsted Incorporated is hereby authorized to solicit bids for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a negotiated basis. Section 3. Sale Meeting. This Council shall meet at the City Hall on Monday, February 5, 1996, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for the purchase of the Bonds, and of taking such action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City. Attest: Adopted this 2nd day of January, 1996. City Clerk Mayor s THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: TERMS OF PROPOSAL $11,175,000* CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1996A (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Monday, February 5, 1996, until 11:00 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (612) 223 -3002 to Springsted. Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal price and coupons, by telephone (612) 223 -3000 or fax (612) 223 -3002 for inclusion in the submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. Proposals may also be filed electronically via PARITY, in -accordance with PARITY Rules of Participation and the Terms of Proposal, within a one -hour period prior to the time of sale established above, but no Proposals will be received after that time. If provisions in the Terms of Proposal conflict with the PARITY Rules of Participation, the Terms of Proposal shall control. The normal fee for use of PARITY may be obtained from PARITY and such fee shall be the responsibility of the bidder. For further information about PARITY, potential bidders may contact PARITY at 100 116th Avenue SE, Suite 100, Bellevue, Washington. 98004, telephone (206) 635 -3545. Neither the City nor Springsted Incorporated assumes any liability if there is a malfunction of PARITY. All bidders are advised that each Proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless of the manner of the Proposal submitted. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated March 1, 1996, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1996. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 1999 $425,000 2003 $ 800,000 2007 $1,475,000 2000 $625,000 2004 $ 900,000 2008 $1,800,000 2001 $650,000 2005 $ 900,000 2009 $1,900,000 2002 $700,000 2006 $1,000,000 The City reserves the right after proposals are opened and prior to award, to increase or reduce the principal amount of the Bonds offered for sale. Any such increase or reduction will be in a total amount not to exceed $200,000 and will be made in multiples of $5,000 in any of the maturities. In the event the principal amount of the Bonds is increased or reduced, any premium offered or any discount k taken by the successful bidder will be increased or reduced by a percentage equal to the percentage by which the principal amount of the Bonds is increased or reduced. BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of Bonds made to the public. The' Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond, representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be registered in the name of Cede & Co. 'as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC "), New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds: 'Individual purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by participants will. be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the Bonds with DTC. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2005, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2006. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge tax increment revenue collections from tax increment financing districts located in the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. The proceeds will be used to refund in advance of maturity the 1997 through 2009 maturities of both the City's $5,100,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1988, dated October 1, 1988, and $5,300,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989, dated April 1, 1989. TAXABILITY OF INTEREST The interest to be paid on the Bonds is includable in gross income of the recipient for United States and State of Minnesota income tax purposes, and is subject to Minnesota Corporate and bank excise taxes measured by net income. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $11,063,250 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $111,750, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must, identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5%100 or 1/8 of 1 %. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of. municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the Bonds from a rating agency,, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to-the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Bonds. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the .failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney P.L.L.P. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment forthe Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable-to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE In order to permit the underwriters purchasing the Bonds to comply with paragraph (b)(5) of Rule 15c2 -12, in the Resolution authorizing and ordering issuance of the Bonds the City will covenant and agree for the benefit of the holders from time to time of the Bonds, to comply with Rule 15c2 -12, paragraph (b)(5). A description of the City's undertaking is set forth in the Official Statement. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, •together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 400 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the -Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated January 2, 1996 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Debra Mangen City Clerk Recommendations For City of Edina, Minnesota $11,175,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 1996A Study No. E1 126K1 SPRINGSTED Incorporated December 27, 1995 Recommendations for City of Edina, Minnesota $1191759000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 1996A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This summary is intended to highlight data contained in the attached Terms of Proposal, the debt service schedule attached and the continuing disclosure and arbitrage information provided to City staff and available to Council members. 1. Action Requested To establish the date and time for receiving bids and establish the terms and conditions of the offering. 2. 3. 4. 19 C'1 Sale Date and Time Monday, February 5, 1996, at 11:00 A.M. with award by the City Council at 7:00 P.M. the same day. Authority and Purpose for the The bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Bond Issue. Statutes, Chapters 469 and 475. Proceeds will be used to refund in advance of maturity the 1997 through 2009 maturities of both the City's $5,100,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1988, dated October 1, 1988, and the $5,300,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989, dated April 1, 1989. The refunding of the 1988 and 1989 Bonds is being done to achieve interest cost savings. Principal Amount of Offering $11,175,000 — Included in the attached Terms of Proposal is a provision that permits the City to . increase or reduce the principal in any of the maturities in a total amount not to exceed $200,000. This will allow for any necessary adjustments to fund the escrow account based on final interest rates and issuance costs. Repayment Term First interest payment due August 1, 1996. Principal due February 1, 1999 through 2009. Source of Revenue and Tax increment revenue collections from tax increment Payment Cycle financing districts located in the City's Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area are expected to be sufficient to make 100% of the debt service payments on the bonds. Each August 1 interest payment will be made from first -half collections of tax City of Edina, Minnesota December 27, 1995 increment revenues and each subsequent February 1 principal and interest payment will be made from second -half collections, plus surplus first -half collections. 7. Prepayment Provisions The February 1, 2006 through 2009 maturities will be callable on February 1, 2005 and any day thereafter at a price of par plus accrued interest. 8. Credit Rating Comments The City's outstanding credit rating is "Aa1" by Moody's Investors Service. We recommend an application be made to Moody's for a rating on this issue. 9. Continuing Disclosure This issue is subject to the new SEC continuing disclosure rules. GENERAL COMMENTS This refunding is structured as a "full net advance" refunding. The proceeds of this issue will be placed in an escrow account with a major bank and invested in government securities. These securities and their earnings are structured to pay debt service on the 1988 and 1989 Bonds through the call date of the 1988 and 1989 Bonds (February 1, 1998), at which time the escrow account will call in and pay the remaining outstanding principal on the 1988 and 1989 Bonds. Beginning with the August 1, 1996 interest payment, the City will begin making debt service payments on this issue, taking advantage of the lower interest rates. Attached is an analytical summary of the refunding. Schedule A shows the combined debt service of the 1988 and 1989 Bonds, as it exists now. On the call date of February 1, 1998 all of the 1988 and 1989 Bonds maturing in 1999 through 2009, totaling $9,875,000, will be called in for redemption. The escrow account will pay all of the remaining debt service on the 1988 and 1989 Bonds. Schedule B shows the estimated debt service for the new refunding bonds. The City will begin to pay debt service on these bonds beginning on August 1, 1996. Schedule C is the total estimated debt service for this issue, the outstanding debt for the 1988 and 1989 Bonds and the estimated net savings (Column 6). This is the City's first issue subject to the new continuing disclosure requirements. These new SEC rules will require the City to undertake an annual update of its Official Statement information and report any material events to the national repositories. Springsted Incorporated provides continuing disclosure services under a separate contract, a copy of which has been provided to your staff. Attachments included: a) Analytical Summary of the Refunding b) Terms of Proposal c) Summary of Continuing Disclosure Requirements (one set included in staff package) Page 2 City of Edina, Minnesota G.O. TAXABLE Refunding Bonds, Series 1996 Full Net Advance Refunding of G.O. TAXABLE Tax Inc. Bonds of 1988/1989 Even Annual Savings Structure Issuer Funds Required: $0.00 Date of Bonds: 03/01/96 Delivery Date: 03/01/96 Refunded Call Date: 02/01/98 1st Callable Date: 02/01/99 Comparison: Refunded Refunding Principal: 10,050,000 11,175,000 Bond Years: 92,862.50 103,718.75 Avg. Maturity: 9.240 9.281 NIC: 9.9240/o 6.746% T. 1 Net Swings 1,288,379,52 Present Value Savings. 1,147,118.20 As "W P.W.. R ef Int 17.:1 As 9'b of P V `Ref. D/S : 9.31 Prepared: 12/21/95 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Page 3 City of Edina, Minnesota TAXABLE Tax Inc. Bonds of 1988/1989 -sting Debt Service Date 08/01/96 02/01/97 08/01/97 02/01/98 08/01/98 02/01/99 08/01/99 02/01/2000 08/01/2000 02/01/2001 08/01/2001 02/01/2002 08/01/2002 02/01/2003 08/01/2003 02/01/2004 08/01/2004 "10112005 01/2005 ..i 01/2006 08/01/2006 02/01/2007 08/01/2007 02/01/2008 08/01/2008 02/01/2009 '^-tals __,id Years: Avg. Mat... NIC ....... . Principal 175,000.00 250,000.00 325,000.00 450,000.00 475,000.00 525,000.00 625,000.00 725,000.00 750,000.00 850,000.00 1,350,000.00 1,700,000.00 1,850,000.00 10,050,000.00 92,862.50 9.240 9.924% Rate 9.600% 9.675% 9.700% 9.700% 9.716% 9.738% 9.788% 9.810% 9.8759o- 9 . 8825k 9.961% 9.983% 10.007% SCHEDULE A Prepared: 12/21/95 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Interest Semi - Annual 496,556.25 496,556.25 488,156.25 488,156.25 476,062.50 476,062.50 460,300.00 460,300.00 438,475.00 438,475.00 415,400.00 415,400.00 389,837.50 389,837.50 359,250.00 359,250.00 323,687.50 323,687.50 286,656.25 286,656.25 244,656.25 244,656.25 177,418.75 177,418.75 92,562.50 92,562.50 496,556.25 671,556.25 488,156.25 738,156.25 476,062.50 801,062.50 460,300.00 910,300.00 438,475.00 913,475.00 415,400.00 940,400.00 389,837.50 1,014,837.50 359,250.00 1,084,250.00 323,687.50 1,073,687.50 286,656.25 1, 136, 656.25 244,656.25 1,594,656.25 177,418.75 1,877,418.75 92,562.50 1,942,562.50 Annual 1,168,112.50 1,226,312.50 1,277,125.00 1,370,600.00 1,351,950.00 1,355,800.00 1,404,675.00 1,443,500.00 1,397,375.00 1,423,312.50 1,839,312.50 2,054,837.50 2,035,125.00 9,298,037.50 19,348,037.50 19,348,037.50 All lower calculations are made from the date of the refunding bonds Page 4 SCHEDULE B City of Edina, Minnesota Prepared: 12/21/95 0. TAXABLE Refunding Bonds, Series 1996 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated .funding Debt Service Date Principal Rate Interest Semi - Annual Annual 08/01/96 02/01/97 08/01/97 02/01/98 08/01/98 02/01/99 08/01/99 02/01/2000 08/01/2000 02/01/2001 08/01/2001 02/01/2002 08/01/2002 02/01/2003 08/01/2003 02/01/2004 08/01/2004 x/01/2005 /01/2005 u2/01/2006 08/01/2006 02/01/2007 08/01/2007 02/01/2008 08/01/2008 02/01/2009 - -)tals pond Years: Avg. Mat... NIC ....... . 425,000.00 625,000.00 650,000.00 700,000.00 800,000.00 900,000.00 900,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,475,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,900,000.00 11,175,000.00 103,718.75 9.281 6.7460 305,479.17 366,575.00 366,575.00 366,575.00 366,575.00 791,575.00 353,825.00 978,825.00 334,762..50 984,762.50 314,612.50 1, 014, 612.50 292,562.50 1,092,562.50 266,962.50 1, 166, 962.50 237,712.50 1, 137, 712.50 208,012.50 1,208,012.50 174,762.50 1,649,762.50 125,350.00 1,925,350.00 64,600.00 1,964,600.00 6,884,679.17 18,059,679.17 Bond Date.: Delivery... Bond Yield: 672,054.17 733,150.00 1,158,150.00 1,332,650.00 1,319,525.00 1,329,225.00 1,385,125.00 1, 433, 925. 00 1,375,425.00 1,416,025.00 1,824,525.00 2,050,700.00 2,029,200.00 18,059,679.17 03/01/96 03/01/96 6.624050 Page 5 305.,479.17 366,575.00 366,575.00 366,575.00 366,575.00 6.0000 366,575.00 353,825.00 6.1000 353,825.00 334,762.50 6.2000 334,762.50 314,612.50 6.3000 314,612.50 292,562.50 6.400 06 292,562.50 266,962.50 6.5000 266,962.50 237,712.50 6.6000 237,712.50 208,012.50 6.650 06 208,012.50 174,762.50 6.7000 174,762.50- 125,350.00 6.7500 125,350.00 64,600.00 6.8000 64,600.00 305,479.17 366,575.00 366,575.00 366,575.00 366,575.00 791,575.00 353,825.00 978,825.00 334,762..50 984,762.50 314,612.50 1, 014, 612.50 292,562.50 1,092,562.50 266,962.50 1, 166, 962.50 237,712.50 1, 137, 712.50 208,012.50 1,208,012.50 174,762.50 1,649,762.50 125,350.00 1,925,350.00 64,600.00 1,964,600.00 6,884,679.17 18,059,679.17 Bond Date.: Delivery... Bond Yield: 672,054.17 733,150.00 1,158,150.00 1,332,650.00 1,319,525.00 1,329,225.00 1,385,125.00 1, 433, 925. 00 1,375,425.00 1,416,025.00 1,824,525.00 2,050,700.00 2,029,200.00 18,059,679.17 03/01/96 03/01/96 6.624050 Page 5 `als 18,059,679.17 Present Value Rate...: 6.624055 Present Value Savings: 1,147,118.20 As % of P.V. Ref . D/S : 9.3116 18,059,679.17 19,348,037.50 1,288,358.33 Excess Proceeds......: 21.19 Funds to Sinking Fund: Total Net Savings .... :1,288,379.52 Page 6 SCHEDULE C City of Edina, Minnesota Prepared: 12/21/95 . TAXABLE Refunding Bonds, Series 19 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated ., ._mal Savings Analysis Refunding Non - Refunded Total New Existing Savings Date Debt Service Debt Service Debt Service Debt Service or (Loss) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 08/01/96 02/01/97 672,054.17 672,054.17 1,168,112.50 496,058.33 08/01/97 02/01/98 733,150.00 733,150.00 1,226,312.50 493,162.50 08/01/98 02/01/99 1,158,150.00 1,158,150.00 1,277,125.00 118,975.00 08/01/99 02/01/2000 1,332,650.00 1,332,650.00 1,370,600.00 37,950.00 08/01/2000 02/01/2001 1,319,525.00 1,319,525.00 1,351,950.00 32,425.00 08/01/2001 02/01/2002 1,329,225.00 1,329,225.00 1,355,800.00 26,575.00 08/01/2002 02/01/2003 1,385,125.00 1,385,125.00 1,404,675.00 19,550.00 08/01/2003 02/01/2004 1,433,925.00 1,433,925.00 1,443,500.00 9,575.00 08/01/2004 '01/2005 1,375,425.00 1,375,425.00 1,397,375.00 21,950.00 01/2005 02/01/2006 1,416,025.00 1,416,025.00 1,423,312.50 7,287.50 08/01/2006 02/01/2007 1,824,525.00 1,824,525.00 1,839,312.50 14,787.50 08/01/2007 02/01/2008 2,050,700.00 2,050,700.00 2,054,837.50 4,137.50 08/01/2008 02/01/2009 2,029,200.00 2,029,200.00 2,035,125.00 5,925.00 `als 18,059,679.17 Present Value Rate...: 6.624055 Present Value Savings: 1,147,118.20 As % of P.V. Ref . D/S : 9.3116 18,059,679.17 19,348,037.50 1,288,358.33 Excess Proceeds......: 21.19 Funds to Sinking Fund: Total Net Savings .... :1,288,379.52 Page 6 THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: TERMS OF PROPOSAL $11,175,000* CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1996A (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Monday, February 5, 1996, until 11:00 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (612) 223 -3002 to Springsted. Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal price and coupons, by telephone (612) 223 -3000 or fax (612) 223 -3002 for inclusion in the submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. Proposals may also be filed electronically via PARITY, in accordance with PARITY Rules of Participation and the Terms of Proposal, within a one -hour period prior to the time of sale established above, but no Proposals will be received after that time. If provisions in the Terms of Proposal conflict with the PARITY Rules of Participation, the Terms of Proposal shall control. The normal fee for use of PARITY may be obtained from PARITY and such fee shall be the responsibility of the bidder. For further information about PARITY, potential bidders may contact PARITY at 100 116th Avenue SE, Suite 100, Bellevue, Washington 98004, telephone (206) 635 -3545. Neither the City nor Springsted Incorporated assumes any liability if there is a malfunction of PARITY. All bidders are advised that each Proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless of the manner of the Proposal submitted. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated March 1, 1996, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1996. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 1999 $425,000 2003 $ 800,000 2007 $1,475,000 2000 $625,000 2004 $ 900,000 2008 $1,800,000 2001 $650,000 2005 $ 900,000 2009 $1,900,000 2002 $700,000 2006 $1,000,000 The City reserves the right, after proposals are opened and prior to award, to increase or reduce the principal amount of the Bonds offered for sale. Any such increase or reduction will be in a total amount not to exceed $200, 000 and will be made in multiples of $5, 000 in any of the maturities. In the event the principal amount of the Bonds is increased or reduced, any premium offered or any discount Page 7 taken by the successful bidder will be increased or reduced by a percentage equal to the percentage by which the principal amount of the Bonds is increased or reduced. BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond, representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC "), New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the Bonds with DTC. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2005, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2006. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge tax increment revenue collections from tax increment financing districts located in the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. The proceeds will be used to refund in advance of maturity the 1997 through 2009 maturities of both the City's $5,100,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1988, .dated October 1,: 1988, and $5,300,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989, dated April 1, 1989. TAXABILITY OF INTEREST The interest to be paid on the Bonds is includable in gross income of the recipient for United States and State of Minnesota income tax purposes, and is subject to Minnesota Corporate and bank excise taxes measured by net income. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $11,063,250 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $111,750, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal If a Page 8 Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety_ Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1 %. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Bonds. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The.CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory -to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be Page 9 subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney P.L.L.P. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE In order to permit the underwriters purchasing the Bonds to comply with paragraph (b)(5) of Rule 15c2 -12, in the Resolution authorizing and ordering issuance of the Bonds the City will covenant and agree for the benefit of the holders from time to time of the Bonds, to comply with Rule 15c2 -12, paragraph (b)(5). A description of the City's undertaking is set forth in the Official Statement. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said. Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 400 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated January 2, 1996 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Debra Mangen City Clerk Page 10 COUNCIL-CHECK REGISTER THU, DEC 28, 1995, 7:10 PM 1 page CHECK NO ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT PO NUM 162136 01/02/96 $10.47 AT 6 T TELEPHONE 112795 CENT SVC GENER TELEPHONE 01/02/96 $8.11 AT & T TELEPHONE 113095 CENT SVC GENER TELEPHONE < *> $18.58* 162137 01/02/96 $202.50 BENN, BRADLEY ART CENTER INSTRUCT 122095. ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 01/02/96 $44.20 BENN, BRADLEY ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CENTER ADM CRAFT SUPPLIES < *> $246.70* 162138 01/02/96 $52.50 BLUHM, KIMBERLEE ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PPOq SALES OTHER < *> $52.50* 162139 01/02/96 $68.25 BUELL, KIM ART WORK SOLD 127095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $68.25* 1`2140 01/02/96, $50.00 CANTON, JANET MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 122695 FINANCE MILEAGE * * 162141 01/02/96 $54.58 CHERRY, MATT PARTS FOR CREDIT CARD 211652 VERNON SELLING PROF SERVICES < *> $54.58* 162142 01/02/96 $3,275.00 COUNTRYSIDE HEATING & CO NEW FURNACE, HEATER A 30281, CDBG PROG PROF SERVICES < *> $3,275.00* 162143 01/02/96 $29.90 DI SABATO, BECKY ARTWORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROD SALES OTHER < *> $29.90* 162144 01/02/96 $800.00 DICKER, TOBIE AC INST. 122095 _ ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 01/02/96 $114.00 DICKER, TOBIE PT MAINT 122095 ART CENTER ADM OFFICE SUPPLIE < *> $914.00* 162145 01/02/96 $94.58 ELLIS, LORETTA KANN ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $94.58* 162146 01/02/96 $151.59 FRONTIER COMMUNICATION TELEPHONE. 121595 CENT SVC GENER TELEPHONE < *> $151.59* 162147 01/02/96 $300.00 GEISHEKER, PATRICIA AC INST 122095 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $300.00* 162148 01/02/96 $168.00 GLEWWE, LINDA AC INST 17.2095 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $168.00* 162149 01/02/96 $2,000.00 GREUPNER, JOE RETAINER 122295 GOLF ADMINTSTR PRO SVC - GOLF < *> $2,000.00* 162150 01/02/96 $58.75 GRIMSBY, NANCY ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $58.75* 162151 01/02/96 $42.84 HAMMER, NANCY ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROD GALES OTHER < *> $42.84* 162152 01/02/96 $29.25 HAWKINS, ANNE ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PRO!; SALES OTHER < *> $29.25* 162153 01/02/96 $195.00 HAYNES, PATRICIA AC INST 122195 ART CENTER ADM-PROF SERVICES COUNCIL CHEt- REGISTER THU, DEC 28, 1995, 7:10 PM page 2 CHECK NO DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT PO NUM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_---------------------------- <*> $195.00* 162154 01/02/96 $35.75 HEALY, BONALYN ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $35.75* 162155 01/02/96 $674.33 JAMES & COMPANY INC BRONZE PLAQUE 1059 WORK. CAP. PRO ACCTS REC MISC 01/02/96 $105.34 JAMES & COMPANY INC PLAQUE 1107 WORK. CAP. PRO ACCTS REC MISC < *> $779.67* 162156 01/02/96 $40.63 JOYCE, TERI D. ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $40.63* 162157 01/02/96 $39.00 KANZ, MARY LOU ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $39.00* 162158 01/0'2/96 $90.00 KOCHENASH, RICK AC INST 122095 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $90.00* 162159 01/02/96 $26.00 LEE, MARGERY ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $26.00* 1 162160 01/02/96 $35.10 LINDSKOOG, JACQUE ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROS SALES OTHER < *> $35.10* 162161 01/02/96 $25.84 LUND, KAREN ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $25.84* 162162 01/02/96 $26.58 LYNDALE GARDEN CTR MAY BALES 100691. CLUBHOUSE ADDT CIP < *> $26.58* 162163 01/02/96 $288.00 MACKERMAN, DANNY AC INST 122095 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> - $288.00* 162164 01/02/96 $8,415.00 METRO WASTE CONTROL OCT SAC CHARGES 112095 GENERAL FD PRO SAC CHARGES 01/02/96 $841.50 METRO WASTE CONTROL NOV SAC CHARGES 120895 GENERAL FD PRO SAC CHARGES < *> $9,256.50* 162165 01/02/96 $800.00 MPCA SEMINAR 122695 TRAINING CONF & SCHOOLS < *> $800.00* 162166 01/02/96 $96.00 MPCA CERT. EXAM FEES 1226 TRAINING LIC & PERMITS < *> $96.00* 162167 011021'6 $196.00 NELSON, J THOMAS A(- TNST 12 2095 ART CENTER A1*1 PRO17 SERVICES < *> $196.00* 162168 01/02/96 $2,809.38 NORTH AMERICAN SALT CO. SALT 861922 SNOW & ICE REM SALT 01/02/96 $2,827.40 NORTH AMERICAN SALT CO. SALT 862395 SNOW & ICE REM SALT < *> $5,636.78* 162169 01/02/96 $8.67 NSP LIGHT & POWER 122895 TRAFFIC SIGNAL LIGHT & POWER 01/02/96 $860.04 NSP LIGHT & POWER 122895 BUILDING MAINT LIGHT & POWER 01/02/96 $2,734.45- NSP LIGHT & POWER 122895 PUMP & LIFT ST LIGHT & POWER 01/02/96 $14.19 NSP LIGHT & POWER 122895 TANKS TOWERS & LIGHT & POWER < *> $3,617.35* A " . COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER THU, DEC 28, 1995, 7:10 PM page 3 CHECK NO DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT PO NUM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 162170 01/02/96 $192.00 ODLAND, DOROTHY AC INST 122095 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $192.00* 162171 01/02/96 $28.28 OLLMAN, DOROTHY ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $28.28* 162172 01/02/96 $81.90 PANCAKE, CHAR ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $81.90* 162173 01/02/96 $23.20 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CE FLU SHOTS 12/16 ST POLICE DEPT. G PROF SERVICES 01/02/96 $11.60 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CE FLU SHOT 12/16 ST FIRE DEPT. GEN PROF SERVICES 01/02/96 $530.10 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CE PRE EMP PHYSICAL 12/16 ST CENT SVC GF.NER ADVERT PERSONL < *> $564.90* 162174 01/02/96 $161.53 RICHARDS, JEFF AND SUE ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $161.53* 162175 01/02/96 $26.00 RIESE, DAVE ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $26.00* 162176 01/02/96 $87.69 RIFFEY, JANE AC SUPPLIES 122095 ART CENTER ADM CRAFT SUPPLIES < *> $87.69* 162177 01/02/96 $71.50 SKUDLAREK, MARK ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR FROG SALES OTHER < *> $71.50* 162178 01/02/96 $50.90 SONNEE, DENNISE ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PRO; SALES OTHER < *> $50.90* 162179 01/02/96 $315.50 SWANSON, KARNA AC INST 122095 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $315.50* 162180 01/02/96 $44.85 TAPPER, BETSY ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $44.85* 162181 01/02/96 $95.55 THOMPSON, BETTY ART WORK SOLD 122095 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER < *> $95.55* 162182 01/02/96 $1,151.91 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 122895 CENT SVC GENER TELEPHONE 01/02/96 $108.55 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 122895 COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 01/02/96 $222.81 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 122895 SKATING & HOCK TELEPHONE 01/02/96 $275.47 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 122895 BUILDING MAINT TELEPHONE 01/02/96 $191.86 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 122895 GOLF DOME TELEPHONE 01/02/96 $611.70 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 122895 ED BUILDING & TELEPHONE 01/02/96 $277.00 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS ADVERTISING OTHER 122895 ED ADMINISTRAT ADVERT OTHER 01/02/96 $222.49 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 122895 ED BUILDING & 'TELEPHONE 01/02/96 $57.63 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 122895 PUMP & LIFT ST TELEPHONE < *> $3,119.42* $33,578.74* COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY THU, DEC 28, 1995, 7:11 PM page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FUND # 10 GENERAL FUND $18,197.25 FUND # 11 COMMUNITY DEVELP. BLOCK GR $3,275.00 FUND # 12 COMMUNICATIONS $108.55 FUND # 15 WORKING CAPITAL $779.67 FUND # 23 ART CENTER $4,131.79 FUND # 27 GOLF COURSE FUND $2,218.44 FUND # 30 EDINBOROUGH /CENTENNIAL LAK $1,111.19 FUND # 40 UTILITY FUND $3,702.27 FUND # 50 LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND $54.58 $33,578.74' x` . - \