HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-01-16_COUNCIL PACKETAGENDA
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 16, 2001
7:00 P.M.
ROT .T .CAT .T .
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 ( *) in bold print are Consent Agenda items and are considered
routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items
unless a Commissioner, Council Member or citizen so requests it. In such cases the item will be
removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF HRA - Year End Meeting of December 28, 2000, and
Regular Meeting of January 2, 2001.
II. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS - Edina School District Bus Garage
III. CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS - As Per Pre -List Dated 1/5 /2001
Total: $11,411.83
IV. ADTOURMENT
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION - EDINA HIGH SCHOOL 2000 GIRLS SWIM TEAM
* I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meetings of December 19, 2000 and January 2,
2001, and Year End Meeting of December 28, 2000.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS - Affidavits of Notice
by Clerk. Presentation by Planner Public Comment heard. Motion to close hearing.
Zonin Ordinances: First and Second Reading require 4/5 favorable rollcall of all
members of Council to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: 4/5 favorable rollcall of all
members of Council to pass. Final Development Plan Approval of Property Zoned
^ Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Conditional Use Permit:
3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass.
Rollcall A. Preliminary Plat Approval - 5343 Interlachen and 5012 Oxford Avenue
Agenda /Edina City Council
January 16, 2001
Page 2
III. AWARD OF BID
A. 3/4 Ton Cargo Van - Edina Liquor Stores
B. Fairway Grass Mower - Braemar Golf Course
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS
A. Traffic Safety Report of January 9, 2001
B. On -Sale Liquor License Transfer of Ownership - Big Bowl Restaurant
C. Blue Ribbon Committee Report
D. Set Board of Review Date for April 16, 2001 at 5:00 p.m.
E. Tentative Dates for Annual Meeting and Volunteer Recognition Dinner
F. Annual Appointments/ Reappointment to Boards, Commissions and Committees
V. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS
VI. CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS
VII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES
VIII. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL
IX. MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEM
X. FINANCE
A. Confirmation Of Payment Of Claims - As per Pre -List dated 1/5 /2001 Total:
$726,529.20 and per Pre -List dated 1/11/01 Total: $654,852.19
Tues
Feb 6
Mon
Feb 19
Tues
Feb 20
Tues
Mar 6
Tues
Mar 20
Sat
Mar 24
Tues
Apr 3
Tues
Apr 17
CHEDULE OF
G MEETINGS
Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M.
PRESIDENT'S DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed
Regular Meeting
7:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting
7:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting
7:00 P.M.
Council Workshop
9:00 A.M.
Regular Meeting
7:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
-COUNCIL CHAMBERS
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
COUNCIL CHAMBE
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES
OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HELD AT CITY HALL
JANUARY 2, 2001 - 7:00 P.M.
OATHS OF OFFICE ADMINISTERED The Oath of Office for Chair of the Edina Housing and
Redevelopment Authority was administered by Clerk Mangen to Dennis F. Maetzold, elected for
a term of four years to January 1, 2005. The Oath of Office for Commissioner was administered
to Scot A. Housh elected for a two year term to January 1, 2003. The Oath of Office for Vice
Chair was administered to Michael F. Kelly elected for a four year term to January 1, 2005. The
Oath of Office for Assistant Secretary was administered to Linda Masica, elected for a term of
four years to January 1, 2005.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica and Chair
Maetzold.
CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Hovland and seconded
by Commissioner Housh approving the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR DECEMBER 19, 2000, APPROVED Motion made by
Commissioner Hovland and seconded by Commissioner Housh approving the Minutes of
the Regular Meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority for December
19, 2000.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BUS GARAGE
PROPERTY PRESENTED Planner Larsen presented a draft Request For Proposal (RFP) for
redevelopment of the School District's bus garage site. The RFP would be issued jointly by the
HRA and the School District. The RFP does not require relocation of the bus garage or
proposals which would incorporate a new garage into a private redevelopment of the site.
Staff expects the School Board to consider the RFP at their January 15, 2001, meeting. If
approved by the Board, staff would return to the Council on January 16, 2001, with a
recommendation. The City would then immediately issue the RFP after approval by the School
Board and HRA. The deadline for proposals is March 2, 2001.
Following a brief discussion, the consensus of the HRA was to acknowledge receipt of the draft
RFP and to await the recommendation of the Board.
There being no further business on the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Agenda,
Chair Maetzold declared the meeting adjourned at 7:15 P.M.
Executive Director ,
MINUTES
OF THE YEAR END MEETING OF THE
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HELD AT CITY HALL
DECEMBER 28, 2000
5:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioner Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, and Chair
Maetzold.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Johnson and
seconded by Commissioner Hovland approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
CLAIMS PAID Commissioner Hovland made a motion approving payment of the
following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 27, 2000, and
consisting of 1 page: HRA Fund $148.22. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Chair Maetzold declared the Year
End Meeting adjourned at 5:05 P.M.
Executive Director
Page 1
T
kilo
�_._-.0NO
To: Members of the HRA
From: Gordon Hughes -City Mgr.
Date: January 16, 2001
Subject: Edina School Bus Garage
REPORURECOM M EN DATION
Agenda Item # II.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ®
To HRA
❑
To Council
Action
®
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
fl Authorize distribution of attached Request For Proposals (RFP) for the School
District's bus garage site.
Info /Background:
The School Board will consider issuing the RFP at their January 15, 2001,
meeting. The only change in the RFP is the addition of specifications for a new garage
contained in Appendix A.
f
N
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
INTRODUCTION:
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) of Edina Minnesota, and
Independent School District 273 (School District) seek proposals for the development of
an 1.76 acre Site, located west of Trunk Highway 100 and south of Vernon Avenue in
Edina. The Site houses the bus garage and fueling operation for the School District.
The School District is fee owner of the Site. The Site is located within the Grandview
Redevelopment Area which was established by the HRA and the City of Edina in 1984.
The School District intends to sell the Site for redevelopment.
All proposals shall include a $300.00 non - refundable evaluation fee. Proposals will be
accepted by the HRA and School District until 4:30 P.M. Friday, March 2, 2001. Twenty-
five copies of each proposal shall be submitted
PROPOSAL CONTENT:
Proposals should, at a minimum, contain the following information:
1. A description of previous development experience.
1
H
2. 'Qualifications of the development team including the owner /developer,
project manager, architect, Site planner and any other major entities of the
development.
3. A description of the developer's fnancial strength and a financial analysis
which describes the contemplated project financing including proposed public
financial participation if any. Please specify the gross purchase price for the
property less any requested public write down. Specify and justify the amount
of any requested public financial participation.
4. A conceptual plan and narrative which depicts the proposed land use, the
intensity of development, the development's relationship to surrounding
properties and a proposed development schedule. The conceptual plan need
not include schematic design or elevations but should be sufficiently detailed
to.allow the HRA and School District to understand the development concept.
All information submitted shall be considered public information unless the proposer
submits evidence satisfactory to the HRA's Attorney that certain information is private or
confidential under the Minnesota Data Practices Act.
PROCEDURES:
The deadline for receiving proposals at the City of Edina offices is March 2, 2001. HRA
staff will evaluate the proposals and submit a report to the HRA on April 3, 2001, or
such other date deemed appropriate by the HRA. The School district will evaluate the
2
proposals during the same time period. Following their individual review, the HRA and
School District will jointly:
1. Select the successful proposal, or
2. Designate more than one developer as, "finalists"
Following this process, the selected developer or the finalists, as the case may be, will
be invited to prepare more detailed development information. Such detailed information
shall be submitted to the HRA and School District not later than 60 days following the
selection of the finalists by the HRA and School District. Detailed information shall
include schematic plans and building elevations as well as detailed financial proposals.
Plans shall at a minimum illustrate the location, exterior dimensions, height, building
materials, parking areas, and floor area of all proposed improvements.
Following receipt of the detailed information, the HRA and School District will schedule
a meeting to hear presentations from each of the finalists and review all information
which has been submitted. Following this review, the HRA and School District will select
the successful developer of the Site and will instruct staff to negotiate a redevelopment
agreement and other agreements to effect the redevelopment of the Site. The HRA and
School District are under no obligation to select any developer. Following a review of all
information, the HRA and School District may instruct staff to seek additional proposals
or may decide to redevelop the Site in another manner.
SELECTION CRITERIA:
K
A
0
The following criteria will be used to evaluate the proposals. These ' criteria are not all
inclusive and are not arranged in order of importance.
1. The proposed project team possesses an identified ability to plan, design and
carryout development of the project.
2. Thee developer, possesses the financial ability to develop the Site as
proposed.
3. The developer has demonstrated a record of accomplishment with respect to
architectural design, construction' management and the on -time delivery of a
project within established budgets and project marketing.
4. The proposed development is compatible with and sensitive to' existing land
uses in the vicinity.
5. The project is responsive to the redevelopment goals of the HRA.
6. The proposed project provides the best value for the School District in terms
of the quality and location of the new bus facility.
7. The proposed project can be accomplished promptly without the need of an
inordinately long staging schedule.
8. The proposed project includes a new or relocated bus facility meeting the
objectives of the School District as set forth in Appendix A.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Site is located in Edina, Minnesota in close proximity to the T.H. 100 and 50`h
StreetNernon Avenue interchange. It measures approximately 1.76 acres in area. The
Site is improved with two industrial buildings; the buildings are used for the bus
4
r
operation of the School District. The site contains the fueling station for the School
District.
The School District seeks a new or remodeled facility to meet current and future needs
of the bus operation. The facility must provided indoor storage for all buses; it must
provide service and wash bays; it must provide adequate parking for employees; and it
must provide on site office space. Please refer to Appendix A for more detailed
specifications.
No environmental testing has been conducted on the Site. The Site is zoned Planned
Industrial District. The successful proposer will be required to initiate and complete a
rezoning of the Site to the appropriate zoning district.
The Site is located within the Grandview Redevelopment Area. This Area was
designated as a tax increment financing district (redevelopment) in 1984. The HRA has
completed a number of public projects within this area. In 1995, the HRA undertook a
streetscape improvement on Vernon Avenue and other streets within the area. In 2000,
The HRA entered into an agreement with Grandview Square LLC ( Opus Northwest and
REC Construction ) for the development of property south of the Site. The HRA intends
to extend the streetscape at its expense along Eden Avenue in connection with the
redevelopment of the Site. Proposals shall state whether or not TIF assistance is
required for the acquisition or development of the project.
HRA DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES:
5
Q
1
The HRA wishes to redevelop the Site in a manner which is complementary to other
land uses within the Grandview area. The HRA will consider proposals for an office
development of the Site, or a mixed - development containing office and ''retail.
Proposers may also consider ' incorporating a new bus facility in the redevelopment
plan.
The HRA will consider developments requiring a rezoning to Planned Office District,
Planned Commercial District, or the Mixed Development District. The successful
proposer will be required to petition .for a rezoning to the appropriate zoning district and
pay all costs and fees with respect to a petition for rezoning. Acceptance of a proposal
by the HRA and School District does not obviate the need for the successful proposer
to receive rezoning approval from the Edina City Council.
The HRA expects that the entire Site will be developed by a single development entity.
Therefore, the HRA will not permit the Site to be subdivided for the purpose of
conveying a portion of the Site to a sub - developer or to a development entity that was
not identified in the proposal.
CONDITIONS:
This request for proposals is not a solicitation for competitive bids. It is intended that the
proposals received will provide information to assist the HRA and School District in
identifying qualified developers who, in the sole discretion of the HRA and School
1.1
District, may participate in further negotiations leading to the sale and redevelopment of
the Site.
The HRA and School District specifically reserve the right to investigate the
qualifications and experience of any proposer, to waive any formal proposal
requirements as to any one or more of the proposals, to reject any and all developers
submitting qualifications or proposals, to obtain proposals from additional developers or
to proceed to redevelop the Site in a different manner. Any proposal submitted shall
become the property of the HRA and School District and may be used for any
purposes relevant to the decisions and actions undertaken by the HRA and School
District toward the redevelopment of the Site.
All questions concerning this Request for Proposals should be directed to Gordon
Hughes, (612) 826 -0401 or Craig Larsen, (612) 826 -0460.
ATTACHMENTS:
The following are attached:
1. Appendix A
2. Site context map
3. Aerial photograph
4. Site survey
5. City of Edina Zoning Ordinance
7
Appendix A
Specifications for Bus Facility
1. Indoor storage for up to 60 buses, approximately 45,000 square feet.
2. Four (4) service bays and two (2) wash bays (50 X 15 ca).
3. Office space approximating 1000 square feet.
4. Drivers lounge approximating 1000 square feet.
5. Bathroom facilities.
6. Equipment storage approximating 500 square feet.
7. Employee parking for up to 60 vehicles.
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF ED..... 1/3/01 :27:29
Council Check Register Page - 1
1/5101 — 1/5/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Un
13620 1/5/01 100668 BRW INC.
182.29 ARCHITECT FEES 10482 267 -10942 9132.1719 PROF FEES ARCH AND ENG CENTENNIAL LAKE TAX DISTRICT
761.34 ARCHITECT FEES 10483 515 -00339 9132.1719 PROF FEES ARCH AND ENG CENTENNIAL LAKE TAX DISTRICT
943.63
13621 115101 100730 DORSEY 8 WHITNEY LLP
9,838.20 LEGAL
9,838.20
13622 1/5101 101537 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG
630.00 MPCA TECHNICAL SERVICES
630.00
11,411.83 Grand Total
10484 838039 9132.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL CENTENNIAL LAKE TAX DISTRICT
10485. R32343000029 9137.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE SUBDI;
61
Payment Instrument Totals
Check Total 11,411.83
Total Payments 11,411.83
y
R55CKSUM3 Vers: LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA 1/3/01 16:30:48
Council Check Summary Page - 1
Company Amount
09000 HRA FUND 11,411.83
11,411.83
We confirm to die best of our bwxvbfte
and belief, that these deims
Comply M all m01191 Floplete
with the requirements of the City
of Edina and
procedures =,5' r4naz>Nj
FinaAble
�.. _
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
JANUARY 2, 2001
7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica and Mayor
Maetzold.
OATHS OF OFFICE ADMINISTERED City Clerk Mangen administered the Oath of Office
for Mayor of the City of Edina to Dennis F. Maetzold, elected for a term of four years to
January 1, 2005; to Council Member Scot A. Housh elected for a term of two years to January
1, 2003; and to Council Members Michael F. Kelly and Linda Masica, elected for terms of four
years to January 1, 2005.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and
seconded by Member Housh approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
40 APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR PRO TEM Mayor Maetzold made a motion to appoint
Member Kelly to fill the position of Mayor pro tem. Member Hovland seconded the
motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Housh, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
*HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 16, 2001, SET FOR PLANNING MATTER Motion made
by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh setting hearing date of January 16,
2001, for the Preliminary Plat Approval for 5343 Interlachen and 5012 Oxford Avenue.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
60 DAY EXTENSION FOR COUNCIL ACTION GRANTED PRELIMINARY PLAT
INTERLACHEN AND OXFORD Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by
Member Housh granting a 60 -day extension for Council action for preliminary plat
approval for 5343 Interlachen and 5012 Oxford Avenue.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*BRAEMAR CLUB HOUSE RENOVATION UPDATE GIVEN Motion made by Member
Hovland and seconded by Member Housh acknowledging receipt of the Braemar Club
House Renovation update.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
Page 1
N
Minutes/Edina City Council/january 2, 2001
*RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -03, APPROVING DESIGNATION OF DIRECTOR/
ALTERNATE DIRECTOR OF SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY Motion made by Member
Hovland and seconded by Member Housh:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-03
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 Margaret (Peggy) Gibbs is hereby designated to serve as Alternate Director of the
Suburban Rate Authority for the year 2001 and until their successors are appointed.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -04, APPROVING DESIGNATION OF . DIRECTOR/
ALTERNATE DIRECTOR OF LOGIS Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by
Member Housh:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-04
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 Eric R. Anderson is
hereby designated as Alternate Director of LOGIS for the year 2001, and until their
successors are appointed.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -01 APPROVING DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER
Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-01
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING
THE EDINA SUN- CURRENT AS
OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the Edina
Sun - Current be and is hereby designated as the Official Newspaper for the City of Edina
for the year 2001.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*SIGNATORY RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -02 APPROVED Motion made by Member
Hovland and seconded by Member Housh:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-02
SIGNATORY RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED that 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 U.S. Bank National Association, Excel Bank,
Fidelity Bank, Wells Fargo Bank (formerly known as . Norwest Bank Minnesota NA),
Richfield Bank and Trust Co., National City Bank/Southdale Office, Firstar Bank, and
Page 2
Minutes/Edina Ci!y Council /ianuary 2, 2001
Western Bank, (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 account 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 signers of the check.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*FACSIMILE SIGNATURE RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -05 APPROVED Motion made by
Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-05
AUTHORIZING USE OF
FACSIMILE SIGNATURES BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS
RESOLVED that the use of facsimile signatures by the following named persons:
DENNIS F. MAETZOLD - Mayor
GORDON L. HUGHES - City Manager
JOHN WALLIN - Treasurer
on checks, drafts, warrants, warrant - checks, vouchers or other orders of public funds deposited in
U.S. Bank National Association, Excel Bank, Fidelity Bank, Wells Fargo Bank (formerly known as
Norwest Bank Minnesota NA), Richfield Bank and Trust Co., Firstar Bank, National City
Bank/Southdale Office, and Western Bank, be and hereby are 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
40 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.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -06 APPROVED Motion made by
Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-06
DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES
BE IT RESOLVED that the U.S. Bank National Association, Excel Bank, Fidelity
Bank, Wells Fargo Bank (formerly known as Norwest Bank Minnesota NA), Richfield
Bank and Trust Co., Firstar Bank, and Western Bank, are authorized to do banking
business in Minnesota, be and are hereby designated as Official Depositories for the
Public Funds of the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, until January 1, 2002.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
OFFICIAL DEPOSITORY RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -07, 7FOR NATIONAL CITY BANK
APPROVED Mayor Maetzold explained that he would be abstaining from any discussion or
final approval of the resolution as he is an officer of National City Bank /Southdale and
turned the meeting over to Mayor pro tern Kelly.
Member Hovland introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-07
DESIGNATING DEPOSITORY
Page 3
i
Minutes/Edina City CounciVTanuary 2, 2001
BE IT RESOLVED that the National. City Bank/Southdale Office, Edina, MN,
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, 2002. Member Housh seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica
Abstaining: Maetzold
Resolution adopted.
*BID APPROVED FOR BID RECOMMENDATION BY CITY OF BLOOMINGTON FOR
BORDER BASIN WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROTECT Motion made by
Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh approving the bid recommendation by
City of Bloomington for Border Basin Water Quality Improvement Project.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
HOUSH APPOINTED TO COMMUNITY EDUCATION SERVICES BOARD Member
Kelly stated that he has not been able to rearrange his work schedule to allow him to attend
the morning meetings of the Community Education Services Board. He asked if another
Council member would consider representing the Edina Council on the Board. Member
Housh said he would be interested in serving on the Board. Member Kelly made a motion
to apppoint Member. Housh as the Edina City Council representative to the Community
Education Services Board. Mayor Maetzold seconded the motion.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Maetzold declared the
meeting adjourned at 7:44 P.M.
City Clerk
Page 4
1
111"
MINUTES.
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
'EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
DECEMBER 19, 2000 - 7:00 P.M.
The December 5, 2000, Regular Council Meeting was cancelled due to a lack of quorum,
and all business from its agenda was handled at the December 19, 2000, meeting.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, and
Mayor Maetzold.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Johnson and
seconded by Member Faust approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
'MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2000, AND TRUTH
IN TAXATION HEARING OF DECEMBER 4, 2000 APPROVED. Motion made by
Member Johnson and seconded by Member Faust approving the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of November 21, 2000, and the Truth In Taxation Hearing of
December 4, 2000.
Motion carried on rollcall vote'- five ayes.
RESOLUTIONS OF COMMENDATION FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS NAN
KRIEGER FAUST AND SCOTT TOHNSON Mayor Maetzold presented resolutions of
commendation to Members Faust .and Johnson thanking them for their service to the
City of Edina and the greater metropolitan community.
APPEAL OF DECISION TO PERMIT A 3.375 FOOT DORMER ADDITION
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Assistant Planner Aaker explained that on November 16, 2000, the Zoning Board of
Appeals approved a 3.375 foot sideyard setback variance to construct a dormer on the
north side of the garage roof of the home located at 5026 Bruce Place. Ron and Karen
Johnson, 5024 Bruce Place have appealed the Zoning Board's approval of the variance.
Ms. Aaker stated the subject property is at the end of Bruce Place cul -de -sac backing up
to Minnehaha Creek. The property consists of a two -story home with an attached two -
car garage that has a bedroom within the roof area above the garage. The bedroom area
above the garage was part of the original construction of the home.
Last spring the homeowners submitted plans to remodel and add onto their home. All
of the improvements conform to the City's ordinance requirements with the exception
of the proposed dormer addition. The dormer would provide added ceiling height and
Page 1
I
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
an egress window to the existing bedroom above the garage. A permit has been issued
and construction has begun for improvements not requiring a variance.
Ms. Aaker said the Zoning Board denied a variance request for a dormer addition June
1, 2000, with a 2 -1 vote. The homeowners redesigned their dormer addition. They
reduced their original request for a six -foot sideyard setback variance by 2.65 feet to the
current'request for a 3.375 -foot sideyard setback'variance.
In November, the Zoning Board heard the request for the re- designed dormer. The new
plan is for a smaller dormer to be in -set from the sidewall of the garage below. The new
proposal extends the dormer 7.5 feet out from the garage roof ridge instead of the
original 10.5 feet and reduces the width of the dormer from 8 feet to 7.5 feet. The
dormer's distance to the side lot line from its closest point will now be at 8.5 feet. The
height of the dormer will be 18.75 feet, requiring a minimum setback of 11.875 feet.
Therefore, the dormer requires a 3.375 -foot sideyard setback. Ms. Aaker concluded that
the planning staff supports the proposed variance request and dormer.
Ms. Aaker reported that on November 16, 2000, the Zoning Board of Appeals heard and
unanimously approved the McElrath's redesigned variance request. The Johnson's,
who own the property next door to the north, at 5024 Bruce Place, are appealing the
Zoning Board's decision. Ms. Aaker presented photos of the properties taken by City
staff as well as those from the McElrath's.
Mayor Maetzold asked if the requested variance was "Unusual. Ms. Aaker replied that it
was . not an untypical request for an existing garage and house. The Board often sees
requests for shed dormers and the McElrath's request is smaller.
Member Faust asked the exact dimension of the' dormer window and how long the
room over the garage had been used as a bedroom. The proponent's architect replied
the window was four feet wide and four feet high.
Doug and Karen McElrath, 5026 Bruce Place addressed the Council. Mr. McElrath
explained that he had lived in the home at 5026 Bruce Place since 1956 and the room
had been a bedroom since that time to his knowledge.
Member Johnson asked the City Attorney to explain the Council's role in this situation,
questioning whether or not it was a denovo review. Attorney Gilligan replied that the
Council would have a denovo review of the variance approval.
Mr. McElrath stated the reason for the requested variance was primarily from their
concern for safety. They have explored all their options for adding 'an egress window to
the dormer and the proposed dormer is the best they can design. He added their home
sits at an angle to the Johnson's home and is 28 feet away from the nearest window. Mr.
McElrath requested the City Council uphold the Zoning Board of Appeals variance
Page 2
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
approval. He said the variance request is not unprecedented and in his opinion, it is
reasonable.
Member Hovland asked if the garage bedroom is being enlarged. Mr. McElrath replied
they would be increasing the air space, but not the floor space with the dormer and
window.
Karen Johnson, 5024 Bruce Place, explained she was the appellant in the variance. Ms.
Johnson said that according to Chief Building Official Kirchman, the garage bedroom
was a legal room. She continued stating that the issue was not really about the 3.375 -
foot dormer variance, but that the bulk of the addition on the large lot was hugging the
lot line between the two homes. Ms. Johnson said the dormer would look directly into
her master bedroom window and substantially change her lifestyle, as well as lower her
property value.
Member Hovland asked if Ms. Johnson had an appraisal showing that her property
value would be lowered. Ms. Johnson replied no, but added that the variance did not
meet the hardship requirement.
Member Kelly stated that he intended to support the variance because in his opinion
safety is important. Member Kelly noted the reason codes are updated is because of
safety concerns. He could understand Ms. Johnson's massing concern, but that was not
the issue of the variance.
Member Faust said she walked the site and even looked at the location from across the
creek and agreed with Member Kelly that she would be supporting the variance
request.
Mayor Maetzold and Member Hovland agreed with Members Kelly and Faust and
echoed their support of the variance. Member Hovland added that he believed the
Council must support the Zoning Board of Appeals decisions absent unique
extenuating circumstances to the contrary.
Member Hovland made a motion to deny the appeal of the variance for 5026 Bruce
Place and uphold the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals in granting the
variance to the proponents Douglas and Karen McElrath. Member Johnson seconded
the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
*AWARD OF BID FOR 18 GOLF CARS - BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE Motion made
by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Faust for award of bid for 18 golf cars,
9 electric and 9 gas, for Braemar Golf Course to recommended low bidder, E -Z -Go
Textron, at $44,310.00.
Page 3
Minutes/Edina Ci!y Council/December 19, 2000
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*AWARD OF BID FOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - VANGUARD APPRAISALS -
ASSESSING DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Johnson and seconded by
Member Faust for award of bid for computer equipment for the Assessing
Department to recommended sole bidder, Vanguard Appraisals.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*AWARD OF BID FOR FOUR POLICE SQUAD CARS Motion made by Member
Johnson and seconded by Member Faust for award of bid for four police squad cars
to recommended bidder Superior Ford Fleet Sales under State of Minnesota Contract
A -174 (5) at $87,430.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote five ayes.
*AWARD OF BID FOR 4 X 4 PICK -UP TRUCK - PARK DEPARTMENT Motion
made by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Faust for award of bid for a 4 x
4 pick -up truck for Park Maintenance to recommended bidder, Grossman Chevrolet
Co., Inc., under State Contract for $16,915.40.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*AWARD OF BID FOR WATER METERS Motion made by Member Johnson and
seconded by Member Faust for award of bid for water meters to sole bidder, Hydro
Supply Company at $49,144.54.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
YEAR 2001 COUNCIL MEETING DATES AND HOLIDAY SCHEDULE APPROVED
Following a brief discussion Mayor Maetzold made a motion, seconded by Member
Hovland approving Council Meeting dates for 2001 as presented with the exception
that the first Council meeting in July not be held.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
*TECHNICAL CORRECTION OF SEPTEMBER 5, 2000, COUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED Motion made by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Faust
approving a technical correction to the September 5, 2000, City Council Minutes.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -`five ayes.
*2001 PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES CONTRACT APPROVED Motion made by
Member Johnson and seconded by Member Faust approving the 2001 Public Health
Services Contract for 2001.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*MUNICIPAL FACILITIES REFUSE COLLECTION CONTRACT RENEWAL
APPROVED Motion made by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Faust
approving the Municipal Facilities Refuse Collection Contract Renewal for 2001.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
Page 4
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
*DECLARATION FOR WETLAND BUFFERS IN PAMELA PARK APPROVED
Motion made by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Faust approving the
Declaration for Wetland Buffers in Pamela Park.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED
DISTRICT APPROVED Motion made by Member Johnson and seconded by
Member Faust approving the Cooperative Agreement with Nine Mile Creek
Watershed District.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
DANCE PERMIT. APPROVED - TWO GUYS FROM ITALY Manager Hughes
explained a request had been received from Argento Inc.,,d.b.a. Two Guys From Italy to
conduct public dances at their restaurant at 7495 France Avenue South. The application
complies with Section 200 of the City Code that regulates public dances. Section 200
provides that the initial permit for public dance shall not be ,for a term of more than 30
days and the renewal after the initial 30 days shall be limited to one year. Mr. Hughes
reported that Chief Siitari found no grounds to deny the requested permit, but
recommended the permit be subject to the applicant using security personnel approved
by Chief Siitari. Mr. Hughes added that staff recommended the dance permit should
commence on any date requested by the applicant, but not later than March 15, 2001.
Daniel Sarno, 7495 France Avenue, applicant, explained his intention was to
compliment his restaurant business. Mr. Sarno stated he would like a permit for a
longer period than the initial 30 -day permit. He said he would have a significant
investment in electronic equipment and for this reason would like a longer permit
period.
Mr. Hughes explained that the Code only allows the initial permit to be 30 days in
length. He stated the initial permit period was the result of a horrendous experience the
City experienced with a public dance establishment several years ago. The Council
discussed the potential areas of concern with a public dance establishment. They also
noted that Mr. Sarno had operated a local business for a number of years.
Member Johnson made a motion granting a thirty day public dance permit to
Argento Inc. dba Two Guys From Italy conditioned upon: Police Chief Mike Siitari's
approval of security personnel and commencement of the permit to be not later than
March 15, 2001. Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION APPROVED DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO PAY CLAIMS TO
CITY MANAGER AND FINANCE DIRECTOR Director Wallin explained that
Minnesota Statutes Section 412.271 subsection 8 allows the Council to delegate its
authority to pay claims made against ' the City to a City administrative official. The
Page 5
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
Council, in delegating their authority to review claims before payment shall have
internal accounting and administrative control procedures to ensure proper
disbursement of public funds. A list of all claims paid under the procedures established
by the Council would be presented to the Council for informational purposes only at
the next regularly scheduled meeting after payment of claims. The Minnesota Statutes
state that the City Council may delegate its authority to pay claims via an adopted
resolution authorizing a specified city administrative official to pay the claims. Staff
recommends the review and approval by both the City Manager and the Finance
Director to authorize payment of claims.
Motion made by Member Kelly introducing the following resolution and moving its
approval:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-124
A RESOLUTION DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO PAY CLAIMS
'TO THE POSITIONS OF CITY MANAGER AND FINANCE DIRECTOR AND IN
THEIR ABSENCE, TO THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND
ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 412.271 Subdivision 1 provides that the
City Council has full authority over the City's financial affairs, including the disbursement
of public funds; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 412.271 Subdivision 8 allows -a City
Council to delegate its authority to pay certain claims; and
WHEREAS, the Edina City Council finds that there are numerous advantages to
the City in delegating this authority to administrative officials; and
WHEREAS, the appropriate internal accounting and administrative control
procedures related to the payment of claims have been developed as presented in Appendix
A, and are hereby approved and incorporated into this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Edina, that the
authority to pay certain claims is delegated to the positions of City Manager and in his
absence to the Assistant City Manager, and to the Finance Director and in his absence to
the Assistant Finance Director; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that claims lists of all claims paid will be presented
to the City Council for informational purposes at the next regular meeting after payment of
the claims.
Adopted this 191h day of December, 2000.
Member Faust seconded the motion.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, . Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Resolution adopted.
ORDINANCE NOS. 2000 -11 AND 2000 -12 ADOPTED, CABLE TELEVISION
FRANCHISE AGREEMENT ORDINANCES - EVEREST MINNESOTA, LLC AND
WIDEOPENWEST, LLC Manager Hughes reminded the Council that September 5,
2000, the Council adopted , resolutions fining that Everest Minnesota LLC, and
WideOpenWest Minnesota, LLC, possessed the necessary qualifications to construct,
own, and operate a system within the City. Following the adoption of these resolutions,
the Southwest Cable Commission (to which 'the City is a member) negotiated
Page 6
Minutes/Edina Cif Council/December 19, 2000
,1
Agreements with the two companies with respect to their proposals to construct and
operate cable systems within the City. The Southwest Cable Commission has approved
the proposed agreements and recommends member cities adopt franchise ordinance
implementing the agreements.
Member Kelly introduced Ordinance No. 2000 -11 and moved its adoption with
waiver of second reading. Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Johnson introduced Ordinance No. 2000 -12 and moved its adoption with
waiver of second reading. Member Faust seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON LIQUOR FEE CHANGES; ORDINANCE NO. 2000 -8
ADOPTED; AMENDING CODE SECTION 185 INCREASING CERTAIN FEES
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Mayor Maetzold explained that before changing fees charged for liquor, existing
licensees were given a thirty -day mailed notice of the hearing pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes. Mr. Hughes explained that as previously discussed, the proposed 2001 On -sale
Intoxicating License fee will be reduced to $8,000.00 from $11,000.00. Further licensees
will have the opportunity to'earn further license reductions up to a maximum $1,000.00
at a rate of $500 per year for satisfactory compliance checks. Mr. Hughes added the On-
sale Wine license fee shall be increased to $2,000; and both Off -Sale and On -Sale 3.2 Beer
licenses are proposed to be $500.00. Mr.. Hughes explained these increases more
accurately reflect the cost of administering the licenses.
Mayor Maetzold called for public comment. No one appeared to speak.
Member Hovland made a motion to close the public hearing. Member Faust
seconded the motion.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Following a brief discussion of the 2001 proposed fees and charges, Member Johnson
introduced the Ordinance No. 2000 -8 and moved its approval waiving second
reading:
ORDINANCE NO. 2000 - 8
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:
Page 7
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
SECTION
PURPOSE OF
AMOUNT
FEE
ISUBSEC.
FEF /CHARGE
NO.
300
300.02
Redemption of
$17.00
15
Subd 2
Impounded
Animals
450
450.27 Subd 4
Public or semi-
$400.00 per annum for each
81
public swimming
pool enclosed part or all of
pool license
the year
$215.00 per annum for each
82
outdoor bath or pool
$115.00 per year for each bath
83
or pool
460
460.06 Subd 1
Sign permit
$75.00
85
605
605.07
Special Hazard
Class III: Special hazard
97
Permit
inspection primarily directed
at, but not limited to,
buildings or occupancies 3000
sf or larger where any of the
following are present:
multiple hazards, storage
handling and/or processes
involving dangerous or toxic
materials, substances and/or
processes; or Occupancies in
which valuation or high
valuation present unique
circumstances $200.00
605
605.07
General Fire
$42.00
99
Safety Inspection
Fee Assessed
Under Provisions
of UFC, Section
105.8
620
620.04
Permit Fee for
$80.00
105
Cleaning
Commercial
Cooking
Ventilation
System
625
625.03
Sprinkler Permit
Per Number of Heads:
110
Fees
201 plus $350.00 for first
200 + $1.00 each additional
head
625
625.03
Fire Pump
$100.00
118
Installation and
Associated
Hardware
Standpipe
Installation 1
$100.00
1119
Page 8
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
716
716.02
Recycling Service
Single Family
131
$5.01/quarter
132
Double Bungalow
$5.01/quarter
133
Apartments /Condos 2 -8 units
$3.69/ quarter
721
721.03 Subd 1
Food
Med risk food - $305.00
136
establishment
Low risk food - $80.00
137
735
735.03
Lodging est
$1.00 /room
153
Supervised group
$30.00
154
home
Boarding &
$80.00
155
lodging house
license
740
740.04
Multiple
$40.00 per single tract of land
157
Dwelling
(may contain more than one
Parking Garage
building under same
License
ownership)
810
810.09
Plat and
$100 per lot (not changed) for
Subdivision
division of one or more lots
Filing Fee
where no new buildable lots'
are created
$500.00 + $50.00/lot
162
All plats and subdivisions
other than above
820
820.01
Filing of
$320.00
170
application for
vacation of street,
alley or easement
850
850.04 Subd 1.0
Variance Fee
Residential , $175.00
190
Commercial $300.00
191
850
850.04 Subd 2.A2
Fee for Transfer
All Other Transfers $900.00
194
of Land to
Another Zoning
District
850
850.04 Subd 4 A2
Conditional Use
Fee shall be equal to City
196
Permit
staff time expended and
City's direct cost incurred in
processing application.
$600.00 deposit with
application submission.
Additional deposits of
$600.00 shall continue to be
made as prior deposits are
expended. Deposits not
expended shall be refunded
to applicant
850
850.04 Subd 6
Final
$600.00
199
Development
Page 9
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
Section 2. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be January 1, 2001.
Page 10
Plan Application
Fee
900
900.07 Subd 1
Liquor License
Fees (per year)
-On -Sale
$8,000.00
206
Intoxicating
- Off -Sale 3.2 Malt
$500.00
207
Liquor
-On -Sale 3.2 Malt
$500.00
209
Liquor
-Wine On -Sale
$2,000.00
211'
- Temporary On-
$61.00
216
Sale 3.2% Malt
Liquor
- Manager's
$81.00
218
License
1100
1100.03 Subd 2
Water service:
1. $0.68 per 100 cubic feet for
242
areas of City, except areas
described below.
2. $1.86 per 100 cubic feet for
243
Morningside area and for
east side of Beard Av.
From W 54th St. to Fuller
St and both sides of
Abbott Pl. from W 54th St.
to Beard Av.
3. Excessive use
244
charge$.22/100 cubic ft.
Meter charge:
Up to 3/4 inch meter - $8.24 qtr
245
1 inch meter - $11.20 qtr
1 1/4 inch meter - $12.79 qtr
11/2 inch meter - $14.39 qtr
2 inch meter - $23.18 qtr
3 inch meter - $87.96 qtr
4 inch meter - $111.96 qtr
1105
1105.01 Subd 1
Service
$1,150.00 per SAC unit x
250
Availability
number of SAC units
Charge (SAC)
computed as pursuant to
Subsection 1105.01, Subd.1
of this Code
1230
1230.07
Sidewalk cafe
$562.00
261
permit
1300
1300.02 Subd 1
Refuse or
$265.00 per year for first
270
Recycling
vehicle
Hauler's License
$80.00 per year for add'1
vehicle
1325.
1325.03
Tobacco Sale
$290.00 per location
280
License
Section 2. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be January 1, 2001.
Page 10
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
Attest
City Clerk
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Ordinance adopted.
Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. 2000 -13 ADOPTED AMENDING CODE SECTION 900.07
PROVIDING REDUCED LICENSE FEES BASED UPON SATISFACTORY
COMPLIANCE CHECKS. Following a brief discussion Member Johnson introduced
Ordinance No. 2000 -13 and moved its approval waiving second reading:
ORDINANCE NO. 2000-13
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 900.07
PROVIDING A REDUCTION IN THE FEE FOR ON -SALE
INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE AFTER TWO
CONSECUTIVE YEARS WITH NO VIOLATIONS
The City Council of the City of Edina Ordains:
Section 1. Section 900.07 of the City Code is hereby amended by adding the
following new Subd. 2 On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License Renewal Fee.
"Subd. 2 On -sale Intoxicating Liquor License Renewal Fee. A business
with an On -sale Intoxicating Liquor License that passes the annual
compliance checks, with no violations carrying a penalty of $500 or
greater, shall be eligible for a reduction in the annual license fee. The
annual license fee reduction shall be up to a maximum of $1,000 for two
consecutive license years with no violations."
Section 2. Subdivisions 2 and 3 of Subsection 900.07 are hereby renumbered
Subdivisions 3 and 4 respectively.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon passage and
publication.
Attest
City Clerk Mayor
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Ordinance adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -119 APPROVED, A RESOLUTION SETTING 2001 PARK
AND RECREATION FEES
Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-119
SETTING 2001 PARK AND RECREATION FEES
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve and set
the following 2001 Park and Recreation Fees.
Page 11
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19,200
PARK AND RECREATION
$26.00
2001
PLAYGROUND
$15.00
ADULT TENNIS INSTRUCTION
$38.00
YOUTH TENNIS INSTRUCTION
$38.00
PEE WEE TENNIS
$27.00
TEAM TENNIS
$64.00
TENNIS CAMP
$79.00
YOUTH SUMMER CLASSIC TENNIS
$13.00
TOURNAMENT
C- Division
ADULT SUMMER CLASSIC TENNIS
$16.00
TOURNAMENT
FAB 4 & 5
$48.00
NATURE CAMP
$55.00
FISHING CLINIC
$5.00
LEADERSHIP/ENCOURAGEMENT/
$10.00
DEVELOPMENT
LEAGUE OF CHAMPS
$15.00
SPORTS SPECTACULAR
$30.00
MN VIKINGS TRAINING CAMP
$15.00
ADULT ATHLETIC FEES
SUMMER SOFTBALL SOFTBALL POST SEASON TOURNEY
2001
2001
Co-Rec & Mens $365.00 Team Entry Fee
$55.00
Classic League
Men's/Women's 35 &
Over & Industrial
League
Non - Resident Fee
(Individual)
Non - Resident Fee
(Team)
FALL SOFTBALL
Co-Rec Leagues
Men's Leagues
Non - Resident Fee
(Individual)
Non - Resident Fee
(Team)
VOLLEYBALL
Officiated Leagues
Non - Officiated
Leagues
Non - Resident
(Individual)
RESIDENT FAMILY:
First 2 members
Each additional member
Maximum (8 members)
$330.00
$26.00
5 -Man C League
$155.00
5 -Man B League
$240.00
4 -Man League
$215.00
$25.00
Co-Rec League
$155.00
-
A- Division
$235.00
B- Division
N/A
C- Division
$10.00
AOUATIC CENTER
SEASON TICKETS
Page 12
BASKETBALL
HOCKEY
BROOMBALL
11-Y.101
$425.00
$425.00
$250.00
$300.00
$120.00/hr
$120.00/hr
$120.00/hr
2001
*65.00/$75.00
$25.00
$225.00
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL:
*40.00/$50.00
NON - RESIDENT FAMILY:
2001
First 2 members
$80.00/$90.00
Each additional member
$30.00
Maximum (8 members)
$270.00
NON - RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL
$50.00/$60.00
Daily Admission
$7.00
Admission after 6 P.M.
$5.00
Aquatic Instruction
$60.00
* Early Bird Special if purchased no later than May 1, 2001.
ART CENTER
2001 MEMBERSHIPS: FAMILY - $40.00 INDIVIDUAL - $30.00
CLASS FEES * (based on # of hours in class) PARENT /CHILD WORKSHOPS*
(Members -10% discount) (includes 1 child and 1 adult)
NON - MEMBERS NON- MEMBER/MEMBER
2001
2001
25 hours $5.25 11 /2 hours
$17/$16
24 hours $5.25 2 hours
$19/$17
21 hours $5.25 3 hours
$23/$21
14 hours $5.25 4 hours
$29/$26
12 hours $5.25 5 hours
$34/$31
8 hours $6.30 6 hours
$37/$33
5 hours $7.00 7 hours
$42/$38
4 hours $7.50 8 hours
$45/$40
*all clay and children's classes add $5.00 *all clay classes add $5.00
ARENA
2001
Hourly Rate (as of 9/95)
$135.00
Open skating (Youth and Adult)
$3.00
Skate Rental
$1.50
Skate Sharpening
$3.00
SEASON TICKETS (set first week of September)
RESIDENT FAMILY:
2001
First 2 members
$70.00
Each additional member
$5.00
Maximum (7 persons)
$95.00
RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL:
$60.00
NON - RESIDENT FAMILY:
2001
First 2 members
$85.00
Each additional member
$5.00
Maximum (7 persons)
$110.00
NON - RESIDENT INDNIDUAL
$70.00
CLASSES
$79.00
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
GREEN FEES
2001
18 hole - non - patron
$30.00
18 hole - patron
$22.00
9 hole - non - patron
$18.00
9 hole - patron
$12.00
GROUP FEES -18 holes
$45.00
Page 13
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
GROUP FEES - 9 holes
$20.00
PATRON CARDS (before April 1)
2001
Individual
$60.00
Executive Course
$25.00
PATRON CARDS (after March 31)
2001
Individual
$65.00
Executive Course
$25.00
COMPUTERIZED HANDICAPS
2001
Resident
$21.00
Non - Resident
$25.00
LOCKERS
2001
Men's 72 inch
$35.00
Men's 42 inch
$25.00
Ladies 72 inch
$15.00
CLUB STORAGE
$40.00
CLUB RENTAL
$8.00
PULL CARTS
$2.50
GOLF CARS
2001
18 holes
$24.00
9 holes
$14.00
18 holes /person with disability /sgl rider
$15.00
Group Car Fees
$36.00
GROUP GOLF LESSONS
2001 .
Adult
$80.00
Junior
$40.00
BRAEMAR ROOM
2001
Resident - wedding related $675.00
Non - residents - wedding related $750.00
Other events $275-$750
Concession Fees (an annual increase of 5 %, as a general rule)
BRAEMAR EXECUTIVE COURSE
GREEN FEES
2001
Adult non - patron
$11.00
Adult patron
$9.00
Junior - non- patron
$7.50
Junior - patron
$6.50
Golf Cars (everyone)
$12.00
Pull Carts
$2.00
Group Fees
$14.00
DRIVING RANGE
2001
Large Bucket
$6.00
Small Bucket
$4.00
Warm -Up Bucket
$2.25
FRED RICHARDS GOLF COURSE
GREEN FEES
2001
Adult - non - patron
$11.00
Adult - patron
$9.00
Junior - non - patron
$7.50
Junior - patron
$6.50
Page 14
Golf Cars (everyone)
Pull Carts
Group Fees
Large Bucket
Senior Bucket
Time Golf 1/2 hour
Hourly Field Rental
League
Daily Passes
Each Additional Member
Maximum (7 members)
Edina Individual
Each Additional Member
Maximum (7 Members)
Non -Edina Individual
Towel Fee
Skate Rental
Locker Rental
Com'1 Use/Trade Shows
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
GOLF DOME
EDINBOROUGH PARK
SEASON PASSES
BUILDING RENTALS
2001
N/A
EXCLUSIVE RENTAL
Friday Evening
Saturday Evening
$1,600.00
$1,600.00
Prom $2,500.00
NON - EXCLUSIVE RENTALS: (per hour)
2001
Great Hall $300.00
Theater $125.00
Grotto
Ice Rink
Pool (swim team only)
$75.00
$100.00
$25.00
Page 15
$12.00
$2.00
$14.00
2001
$6.50
$6.25
$9.00
$110.00
$700.00
2001
$4.00
2001
$25.00
$280.00
$200.00
$30.00
$330.00
$230.00
$1.00
$1.50
$0.25
Any Park
2001
Banners
$150.00
Use of
$125.00
Rink Area
Cover Ice
$400.00
Area
$ 200.00
Domestic Photo Shoot (hourly)
Any Park
$75.00
Area
Blocked
Off
Grotto
$ 75.00
Theatre
$ 75.00
Great Hall
Ice Rink
Commercial Photo
Shoot
(hourly)
Any Park
$ 200.00
Area
Blocked
Off
Grotto
$ 200.00
Theatre
$ 200.00
Great Hall
$ 300.00
Ice Rink
$ 300.00
Minutes/Edina Ci!y Council/December 19, 2000
CENTENNIAL LAKES
Rental Concession Items Weekend Rental -
2001 Full Evening (6 PM -1AM)
Paddle Boats
4 person boat ' /z hr $ 5.00
Winter sled per hr $ 3.00
Ice Skates .$3.00
BUILDING RENTALS
'/x day - Salon $150.00
Full day - Salon $300.00
Amphitheater Rental
Amphitheater Rental $200.00
COMMERCIAL $50.00/hr
PHOTO SHOOT
Lawn Games
Per Court $10.00
PARK DEPARTMENT RENTALS
General Park Areas: Van Valkenburg/Courtney Fields
(Residents Only)
2001
Resident Use/hour $36.00
Resident Use/day
2001
Friday evening
$675.00
Saturday evening
$675.00
Champion Putting
$120.00
9 hole
$4.00
18 hole
$7.00
Lawn Games
Per Court $10.00
PARK DEPARTMENT RENTALS
General Park Areas: Van Valkenburg/Courtney Fields
(Residents Only)
2001
Resident Use/hour $36.00
Resident Use/day
$108.00
Commercial Use (i.e.
$65.00
TV)/hour
Commercial use with
$120.00
light/hour
gardens /gazebo
Picnic shelter /day -
$108.00
Cornelia
Each additional hour
Showmobile/day
$700.00
Athletic Fields - Residents Only:
Per field - per day'
$108.00
Per field - per hour
$36.00
Per field - per hour
$57.00 .
(with lights)
Arneson Acres Terrace Room:
Per day /w /formal
$130.00
gardens /gazebo
Per hour, first hour
$ 50.00
Each additional hour
$ 25.00
up to 4 hours
$7.00
Rosland Park Pathway:
Park Shelter Buildings (full -day)
Weber Park $70.00
Cornelia School Park $70.00
Todd Park $70.00
Walnut Ridge Park $70.00
Per hour $52.00
Per day $206.00
PEGGY KELLY MEDIA ARTS STUDIOS
DO -IT YOURSELF 2001 EQUIPMENT
SERVICES HOURLY RENTAL
FEE
Page 16
2001
2 DAY
RENTAL
2001
Per field/day includes
$154.00
building
Edina Athletic Associations
Field User
.$7.00
fee/participant
Edina Hockey Association
Outdoor Hockey Rink
Field User
$7.00
fee/participant
Park Shelter Buildings (half -day)
Weber Park
$40.00
Cornelia School
$40.00
Park
Todd Park
$40.00
Walnut Ridge Park
$40.00
Park Shelter Buildings (full -day)
Weber Park $70.00
Cornelia School Park $70.00
Todd Park $70.00
Walnut Ridge Park $70.00
Per hour $52.00
Per day $206.00
PEGGY KELLY MEDIA ARTS STUDIOS
DO -IT YOURSELF 2001 EQUIPMENT
SERVICES HOURLY RENTAL
FEE
Page 16
2001
2 DAY
RENTAL
I
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
Transfer movies to video $12.00
35mm Slide
$15.00
Projector
Pictures or slides to $12.00
Dual Slide
N/A
video (album)
Projector
w/Dissolve Unit
Audio Dubbing or $12.00
VHS Camcorder
$25.00
Transfer
Digital Video Editing $20.00
Overhead
new $20.00
Projector
old $10.00
35mm Photo Copies $7.00
Opaque
N/A
Projector
35mm Slide Copies $7.00
16mm Movie
$20.00
Projector
VHS Video Copies $4.00
Super 8mm
$16.00
(up to 3 at one time)
Projector
Studio does it
with sound
Foreign Conversion $7.00
8mm Movie
$11.00
(PAL, SECAM)
Projector
Studio does it $10.00
Laminator/Heat Press $4.00
Lowell Light Kit
$20.00
Audio Cassette Dupl. $1.00/
Wireless Mike
$20.00
copy
Kit
Customer provides blank cassettes (video and audio), film and lamination
supplies.
PHOTO/VIDEO STUDIO RENTAL
2001
Photo Studio - not staffed
$30.00/hr non member
$15.00 member
COMPUTER OPEN STUDIO TIME
2001
Macintosh G3 or Compaq 266 Mhz PC
$8.00/hr.
(includes use of Adobe Photoshop, PageMaker and
non - members pay
Illustrator software with Epson Color Stylus
an add'1$10.00 daily
printing - prints purchased separately)
access fee
MEMBERSHIP
All equipment or facility rentals requires a membership.
2001
One day /one visit pass - $10.00
$10.00
Annual Individual Membership (12 months)
$30.00
Annual Family Membership (12 months)
$40.00
Member Faust seconded the motion
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-120, A RESOLUTION SETTING AMBULANCE FEES FOR
2001 Following a brief discussion Member Faust introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-120
SETTING AMBULANCE FEES FOR 2001
Page 17
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve and set
the following ambulance service fees for 2001.
AMBULANCE FEES
Service Level Fees for Ambulance Service, including medical treatment and/or
transportation to a medical facility:
Level 1- ON SCENE TREATMENT
Specialized medical services performed at
scene with no transport involved
Level 2 - MINOR CARE (BLS)
Vital Signs
Splinting
Bandaging, etc.
Level III - MODERATE CARE (ALS)
IV, Nitrous, Nitro Spray, ASA
EKG Monitoring
Spine Immobilization
Level IV - MAJOR CARE
Medications
MAST (inflated)
Cardiac Pacing
Airway Management
Level V - RESPIRATORY /CARDIAC ARREST
Level IV plus any: Cardio/Pulmonary
Resuscitation (CPR)
Defibrillation
OXYGEN ADMINISTRATION
MILEAGE FROM SCENE TO HOSPITAL
ADDITIONAL MANPOWER OR MECHANICAL
EXTRICATION
Member, Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Resolution adopted.
2001
$225.00
$495.00
$605.00
$700.00
$850.00
$35.00
$10.00 /mile
$320.00
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -121 - A RESOLUTION SETTING MISCELLANEOUS FEES
FOR 2001 The Council briefly discussed the miscellaneous fees, then Member Kelly
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-121
SETTING MISCELLANEOUS FEES
FOR 2001
BE IT RESOLVED that the-Edina City Council does hereby approve and
set the following miscellaneous fees for 2001:
SPECIALIZED RESPONSE
2001
Engine/Fire Company $250.00
Ladder Company $300.00
HazMat Unit $400.00 per hour
Page 18
4
Minutes/Edina Cif Council/December 19, 2000
Special Operations Team $300.00
Limited Response $100.00 per hour
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
2001
Zoning Compliance $125.00
Letter
Member Faust seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Resolution adopted.
RESOLUTION 2000 -122 APPROVED ADOPTING 2001 OPERATING BUDGET After
a brief discussion Member Faust introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-122
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR
THE CITY OF EDINA FOR THE YEAR 2001, AND
ESTABLISHING TAX LEVY FOR YEAR 2001,
PAYABLE IN 2001
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA MINNESOTA DOES RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Budget for the City of Edina for the calendar year 2001 is hereby
adopted as after this set forth, and funds are hereby appropriated therefore:
GENERAL FUND
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Mayor and Council
$ 69,040
Administration
878,670
Planning
328,851
Finance
506,756
Election
106,220
Assessing
666,014
Legal and Court Services
360,000
TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT
PUBLIC WORKS
Administration
$ 160,264
Engineering
642,568
Streets
3,913,725
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS
Page 19
$ 2,915,551
$ 4,716,557
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
I
PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY
Police $ 5,496,396
Civilian Defense 41,764
Animal Control 77,458
Fire 3,328,585
Public Health 483,791
Inspections 557,453
TOTAL PROTECTION OF $ 9,985,447
PERSONS/PROPERTY
PARK DEPARTMENT
Administration $ 588,087
Recreation 159,163
Maintenance 1,796,827
TOTAL PARK DEPARTMENT $ 2,544,077
NON - DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURES
Contingencies $ 80,000
Special Assessments on City Property 24,000
Capital Plan Appropriation 100,000
Fire Debt Service 84,000
Commissions and Special Projects 197,793
TOTAL NON - DEPARTMENTAL $ 485,793
EXPENDITURES
TOTAL GENERAL FUND $20,647,425
Section 2. Estimated receipts other than the General Tax Levy are proposed as hereinafter set
forth:
GENERAL FUND
HACA $
979,864
Other Taxes
(145,000)
Licenses and Permits
1,771,480
Municipal Court Funds
743,370
Department Service Charges
1,514,731
Other
164,010
Transfer from Liquor Fund
476,890
Income on Investments
53,497
Aid -Other Agencies
319,607
Police Aid
330,630
TOTAL ESTIMATED RECEIPTS
$ 6,209,079
Section 3. That there is proposed to be levied upon all taxable real and personal
property in the City of Edina a tax rate sufficient to produce the amounts hereinafter
set forth:
GENERAL FUND $
14,438,346
Passed and adopted by the City Council on December 19, 2000.
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Page 20
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 19, 2000
Resolution adopted.
CLAIMS PAID Motion made by Member Faust approving payment of the following
claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated November 29, 2000, and
consisting of 51 pages: General Fund $463,875.24; C.D.B.G. $4,190.00,
Communications Fund $1,028.61; Working Capital Fund $3,592.05; Construction Fund
$5,078.65; Art Center Fund $16,358.52, Golf Dome Fund $1,360.44; Aquatic Center
Fund $1,214.04; Golf Course Fund $15,362.57, Ice Arena Fund $5,386.55;
Edinborough/Centennial Lakes $17,404.89; Liquor Fund $313,932.50, Utility Fund
$49,552.20, Storm Sewer Fund $502.76; Recycling Fund $94.00; HRA Fund $500,000.00;
Payroll Fund $450,000.00 TOTAL $1,848,933.02.; and for claims as shown in detail on
the Check Register dated December 14, 2000, and consisting of 62 pages: General
Fund $438,117.08; Communications Fund $13,014.95; Working Capital Fund
$71,107.09; Construction Fund $56,937.52; Art Center Fund$13,895.34; Golf Dome
Fund $15,801.34, Aquatic Center Fund $5,640.10, Golf Course Fund $42,811.38; Ice
Arena Fund $54,492.84, Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund $25,660.53, Liquor Fund
$322,244.02, Utility Fund $80,620.14; Storm Sewer Fund $2,651.72; Recycling Fund
$41,018.38; HRA Fund $95,000.00, Payroll Fund $400,000.00; TOTAL $1,679,012.43.
Member Johnson seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Johnson, Maetzold
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Maetzold adjourned the
Council Meeting at 8:55 P.M.
Page 21
City Clerk
MINUTES
OF THE YEAR END MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
DECEMBER 28, 2000
5:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, and Mayor
Maetzold.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Johnson and
seconded by Member Hovland approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
YEAR 2000 BUDGET FORECAST REVIEWED Manager Hughes reviewed the year end
budget forecast for the City's General Fund revenues and expenditures. Following a brief
Council review and discussion, receipt of the forecast was accepted.
Member Johnson made a motion to accept the preliminary budget forecast as presented.
Member Kelly seconded the motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
CLAIMS PAID Member Kelly made a motion approving payment of the following claims
as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 27, 2000, and consisting of 45
pages: General Fund $380,051.66; CDBG Fund $2,223.00; Communications Fund $14,263.87;
IBR #2 Fund $20,126.26; Working Capital Fund $8,557.96, Construction Fund $7,131.75; Art
Center Fund $11,317.19; Golf Dome Fund $9,764.16, Aquatic Center Fund $210.69, Golf
Course Fund $8,690.05; Ice Arena Fund $14,355.07; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund
$34,666.19, Liquor Fund $337,628.18; Utility Fund $21,862.31; Storm Sewer Fund $100.00;
HRA Fund $270,000.00, Payroll Fund $400,000.00; TOTAL $1,540,948.34. Member Hovland
seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
AMENDMENT TO YEAR 2001 COUNCIL MEETING DATE SCHEDULE Manager
Hughes noted that at the December 19, 2000, Regular Council Meeting approval was granted
to the 2001 Council Meeting Dates and Holidays. Inadvertently, the September 181h meeting
was scheduled on Rosh Hashanah. The second meeting in September has been rescheduled to
Wednesday, September 19, 2001.
Page 1
Minutes&dina City Council/December 28, 2000
Following a brief Council discussion, Member Johnson made a motion approving the
amended the 2001 Council Meeting Dates and Holidays as presented. Member Kelly
seconded the motion
Ayes: Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
'UNION RE- OPENERS - LOCAL 49 (PUBLIC WORKS AND PARK MAINTENANCE),
LOCAL 320 (POLICE, PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS, ANIMAL CONTROL); IAFF
1275 (FIREFIGHTERS) APPROVED Motion made by Member Johnson and seconded by
Member Hovland approving the Union Re- openers - Local 49 (Public Works and Park
Maintenance), Local 320 (Police, Public Safety Dispatchers, Animal Control); IAFF 1275
(Firefighters).
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Maetzold declared the Year
End Meeting adjourned at 5:35 P.M.
Acting City Clerk
Page 2
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Craig Larsen -City Planner
Date: January 16, 2001
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
Agenda Item # II. A.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
® To Council
Subject: Preliminary Plat Approval
Action
for JMS, Inc. 5012 Oxford ❑ Motion
and 5343 Interlachen ® Resolution
Boulevard. ❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission recommends denial of the proposed Preliminary Plat.
Info /Background:
The Planning Commission has reviewed two proposals at three meetings for
these properties. The first proposal was for a five lot, zero lot line development. That
proposal was withdrawn by the developer at the November 1, 2000, Commission
meeting. The zero lot line proposal requires a multi - family zoning, in this case a
PRD -3 zoning was required.
The developer returned at the November 29, 2000, meeting with a four lot
traditional plat proposal for the properties. This proposal did not require a rezoning.
After the Commission meeting it was discovered that the Commission's
recommendation was based on incorrect data relating to lot sizes in the 500 foot
neighborhood. Consequently, it was necessary to return to the Commission for
reconsideration of the request.
The proposal was reconsidered by the Commission at their January 3, 2001,
meeting. After receiving the revised data relating to the neighborhood median values
for lot width, lot depth, and lot area, and receiving testimony from staff and neighbors,
the Commission voted to recommend denial of the proposed subdivision.
Please refer to: attached draft Planning Commission minutes, staff reports,
plans, and information presented by the neighbors.
1
DRAFT NOTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 3, 2001
Preliminary Plat
JMS, Inc.
S-00 -5 Brookside Heights
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the Planning Commission reviewed
a five lot, zero lot line development of this property at their November 1, 2000,
meeting. That proposal was viewed under multi - family zoning standards, and
would have required a rezoning of the property. After hearing testimony and
comments from the Commission the request was withdrawn. The proponent
submitted a revised plan, a four lot conventional plat, for the November 29,
meeting. The Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat. After
the meeting it was discovered that errors were made in data representing the
500 foot Neighborhood, which requires that the proposal return to the
Commission.
Mr. Larsen concluded although all of the lots require variances, this is a
development that fits its neighborhood. The most important measure, lot width,
fits the development pattern in the Brookside Heights neighborhood. The
numbers are skewed because this property is at the edge of the neighborhood
causing the larger lots to the north and west to become part of the formula. The
best way to ensure that the new houses are compatible in size and scale with
existing homes is to provide a similar lot width. The one and a half story homes
the developer intends to build would be compatible. If the plat were reduced to 3
lots, variances would still be required. However, 3 larger lots would likely result
in homes much larger than the typical home in Brookside Heights. Staff
recommends preliminary plat approval, including the requested variances
conditioned on:
1. Final Plat approval
2. Subdivision dedication
3. Watershed District permits
4. New homes would conform in size and scale to the plans presented.
Mr. Roger Anderson and Mr. Rob Pleggman were present representing
the applicant, Mr. Jeff Schoenwetter.
Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen what the problem is
concerning water run -off. Mr. Larsen explained water runs down Oxford Avenue,
crosses Interlachen Boulevard and continues down Hollywood Road to the low
It ponding area. Continuing, Mr. Larsen said in 1987 the home located at 5340
Hollywood Road received property run -off damage. Mr. Larsen said events such
as the 1987 flood are difficult to plan for, but changes have been made to the -
system in an attempt to prevent future problems.
Commissioner Ingwalson commented he supported the proposal that was
presented at the last meeting, and pointed out that proposal depicted a different
set of numbers. Mr. Ingwalson asked Mr. Larsen what changed since the last
meeting. Mr. Larsen told the Commission he apologizes for the incorrect
numbers presented at the last meeting. He reminded the Commission at that
meeting it was brought up by residents that there is a discrepancy with the
numbers. Mr. Larsen explained the next day staff recalculated the 500 foot
neighborhood and found the numbers presented by the proponent were correct
but an incorrect scale was used in calculating the neighborhood resulting in
incorrect numbers. Mr. Larsen said staff decided another meeting was needed
to present the Commission with the correct numbers.
Mr. Rob Pleggman, explained to the Commission the design concepts for
the proposed homes have not changed from the previous meeting. Mr.
Pleggman asked the Commission to note the home now proposed for the corner
lot is a rambler as requested by the Commission at their last meeting.
Continuing, Mr. Pleggman told the Commission the footprints for the proposed
homes will be approximately 1351 square feet, with an additional 1200 feet if the
lower level is finished. Mr. Pleggman said if a client decides on the story and
one half home. 808 square feet can be added.
Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Pleggman why the smallest lot
continues to be located on the corner. She added she recalls at the,last
Commission meeting the Commission requested that the largest lot be platted on
the corner to better afford a greater setback from Interlachen Boulevard.
Mr. Anderson responded if so desired that can be accomplished.
Continuing, Mr. Anderson said it was felt the additional 1 Y2 feet would better
benefit the interior lots.
Mr. Anderson explained in response to Commissioner McClellands
comments on drainage that he is waiting to speak to the City Engineer on
drainage options. Mr. Anderson said in his opinion the development will need to
be constructed with underground pipes. He said he believes because of the size
of the site a drainage pond will not work. Mr. Anderson said in previous
conversations with Mr. Hoffman it was suggested to construct a berm along
Interlachen Boulevard with a large drainage pipe. Mr. Anderson said the
proponent will work with the City Engineer to ensure proper drainage control.
Commissioner Byron referred to #4 of staffs recommendations and asked
Mr. Larsen what he means by "plans presented ". Mr. Larsen said if this proposal
is approved his goal is to ensure that the homes constructed on this site match in
scale the existing homes in the Brookside Heights neighborhood. Continuing,
Mr. Larsen said the footprints presented will be considered final. No variances
from setbacks will be allowed. Commissioner Byron said if approved as
presented can the Commission be guaranteed that on Lot 1 a rambler will be
constructed. Mr. Larsen said that is correct, if approved a one story home
(rambler) will be the only housing style that can be constructed on that lot.
Commissioner Runyan commented that the 500 foot neighborhood in this
instance is.varied. Mr. Larsen said he agrees, this site appears to sit at the edge
of four different neighborhoods, acknowledging the 500 foot neighborhood
analysis does not always answer all questions.
Commissioner Workinger asked how far the proposed home on Lot 1 will
be from Interlachen Boulevard. Mr. Anderson said the home will, be at minimum
25 feet from Interlachen Boulevard.
Mr. Richard Miller, 5340 Hollywood Road, told the Commission from the
start this proposal has had problems. He pointed out in the beginning the sign
indicating a subdivision would occur was placed in an area on the property
difficult to see.. The developer has also supplied erroneous information regarding
lot calculations, and actions by the Commission were based on wrong numbers.
Mr. Miller asked the Commission to deny the request to subdivide.
Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen to explain for her lot.coverage
requirements on lots less than 9,000 square feet. Mr. Larsen explained on lots'
less than 9000 square feet lot coverage cannot exceed 30% or 2,250 square feet
whichever comes first. -
Mr. Leenders, 5317 Hollywood Road, told the Commission he is opposed
to the requested subdivision. Mr. Leenders submitted to the Chairman a packet
he assembled containing materials and his comments and requested they be
read into the record. Attached to the minutes as "Exhibit A ".
Mr. Robert Tessmann, 5109 Blossom Court, told the Commission he
opposes the proposed subdivision and asked the Commission to deny the
request of the proponent.
Ms. Tostenson, 5137. William Avenue, told:the,Commission she does not
support the construction of small houses on this corner lot.
Ms. C. Bisson, 5340. Hollywood Road, submitted to the Commission her
written comments and asked _them to be read into the minutes. Attached as
"Exhibit B
Mr. Don Peterson, 5403 Interlachen Boulevard, told the Commission in his
opinion if this request is approved the City would be defenseless in stopping
others from subdividing'their property.
Mr. Wallenkamp, 5332 Hollywood Road, told the Commission water run-
off continues to be a problem. He concluded he wants the character of the area
to be maintained, and in his opinion this proposal will negatively impact the
neighborhood.
Ms. Greer, 5109 Bedford Avenue, told the'Commission she crosses
Interlachen Boulevard at Oxford Avenue and wants that site developed
appropriately. She stated she does not believe what is proposed suits the
neighborhood.
Mr. Pleggman thanked the neighbors for their comments and said he
understands their concerns. He explained the driveways for the proposed four
homes will be off Oxford Avenue, not Interlachen Boulevard which in his opinion
provides safety. He stated drainage will be addressed to ensure proper
standard's are implemented. Mr. Pleggman said in his opinion the four proposed
homes will maintain the character of the neighborhood.
Commissioner Runyan said he feels the house proposed to be located on
the corner of Oxford and Interlachen should be a rambler style home. He said in
his opinion this. is a difficult decision because redevelopment of' the subject lots
needs to occur. Commissioner Runyan stated he believes four homes are too
much on this corner, and two homes may be too few. Commissioner Runyan
said he cannot support the proposal as presented at four homes.
Commissioner Ingwalson told the Commission he recommended approval
of a four lot subdivision at the last meeting because he believed minimal or no
variances would be required. Commissioner Ingwalson said in light of finding the
lot calculations were incorrect he cannot support the proposal, the variances
required are too significant. Commissioner Ingwalson acknowledged something
needs to be developed at this location, but he is not sure on what is right.
Commissioner Swenson stated she grew up on Skyline Drive, and in her
opinion four homes are too much at this location and for this 500 foot
neighborhood.
Commissioner Lonsbury told the Commission for the past three meetings
the Commission and neighborhood have listened to much discussion regarding
this proposal, right numbers, wrong numbers, not my neighborhood, my
neighborhood, etc., and he appreciates all the comments and feelings
expressed. Continuing, Commissioner Lonsbury explained to members of the
neighborhood the Commission also represents the 45,000 Edina residents not
present this evening. Commissioner Lonsbury said this proposal has been
difficult for him because he believes redevelopment of this area would be a plus
for the neighborhood and community at large, and that the proposed concept is
good. Commission Lonsbury added he commends the developer for this
concept, but he cannot support four homes on this corner. Concluding,
Commissioner Lonsbury said he wishes he could suggest what is right for this
site but he can't.
Mr. Larsen told the Commission they need to take action on what is
before them this evening and more this forward to the Council.
Commissioner Swenson moved to the deny the request for a four lot
subdivision. Commission Ingwalson seconded the motion. Ayes; Lonsbury,
Swenson, McClelland, Ingwalson, Runyan, Workinger, Berman, Johnson. Nay,
Byron. Motion to deny carried 8 -1.
OT l` r ICI:
a wil 1, NO 110 IM NJ: MM
__®_
®_
a wil 1, NO 110 IM NJ: MM
EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 3, 2001
STAFF REPORT
Preliminary Plat
JMS, Inc.
S -00 -5 Brookside Heights
The Planning Commission reviewed a five lot, zero lot line development of
this property at their November 1, 2000, meeting. That proposal was viewed
under multi - family zoning standards, and would have required a rezoning of the
property. After hearing testimony and comments from the Commission the
request was withdrawn. The proponent submitted a revised plan, a four lot
conventional plat, for the November 29, meeting. The Commission
recommended approval of the preliminary plat. After the meeting it was
discovered that errors were made in data representing the 500 foot
Neighborhood, which requires that the proposal return to the. Commission.
Revised numbers for lots within the 500 foot Neighborhood surrounding
the proposed subdivision have the following dimensions and areas.
Lot Width Lot Depth Lot Area
75 feet 136 feet 9,750 sq. ft.
Lots within the proposed subdivision have the following dimensions and areas.
Lot 1 48.69 feet* 133 feet* 6,493 sq. ft.*
Lot 2 50 feet* 133 feet* 6,659 sq. ft.*
Lot 3 50 feet* 133 feet* 6,659 sq. ft.*
Lot 4 50 feet* 132 feet* 6,638 sq. ft.*
* requires variance
All lots require lot depth, lot width, and lot area variances.
The house pads illustrated on the preliminary plat represent the house
designs that the proponent showed the Commission at the November 1, 2000,
meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Although all of the lots require variances, this is a development that fits its
neighborhood. The most important measure, lot width, fits the development
pattern in the Brookside Heights neighborhood. The numbers are skewed
because this property is at the edge of the neighborhood causing the larger lots
to the north and west to become part of the formula. The best way to ensure
that the new houses are compatible in size and scale with existing homes is to
provide a similar lot width. The one and a half story homes the developer
intends to build would be compatible. If the plat were reduced to 3 lots,
variances would still be required., However, 3 larger lots would likely result in
homes much larger than the typical home in Brookside Heights. Staff
recommends preliminary plat approval, including the requested variances
conditioned on:
.1. Final Plat approval
2. Subdivision dedication
3. Watershed District permits
4'. New homes would conform in size and scale to the plans presented.
DvA 1Ohl2
'
Comm 9689 - Lot Calcs - -- DEPTH
Area From
Internet
Name
Address
PID No.
Legal
Width
Depth
Area
feet
feet
(so
1
Sandra K. Strom
5313 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0160
Lot 1, Block 1, Rowlands Addn.
65
108
7020
2
T.G. Peterson
5005 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0161
Lot 2, Block 1, Rowlands Addn.
65
108
7020
3
Mark S. Simmons
5017 Bedford ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0055
Lot 22, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
128.8
6440
41
Deborah A. Hoffman
5013 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0056
Lot 23, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
54.7
128.8
7045.36
5
H.G. Wahlquist, Etal.
5012 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0061
Lot 6, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
54.8
128.8
7058.24
6
P. &L. Knaeble
5013 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0077
Lot 23, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
55.2
128.8
7109.76
7
Jan Blakely Holman
5021 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0054
Lot 21, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
128.9
6445
8
Steven Hansen, Etal.
5016 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0062
Lot 7, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
128.9
6445
9
Wayne B. Hierlmaier
5017 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0076
Lot 22, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
128.9
6445
10
D.C. & J.A. Lerum
5025 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0053
Lot 20, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
129
6450
11
Jo ce G. Rep a
5020 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0063
Lot 8, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129
6450
12
Judith J. Romine
5021 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0075
Lot 21 & N. 1/2 of Lot 20, Block 4, Brookside Hgts
75
129
9675
13
Michael P. Makowski
5024 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0064
Lot 9, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.1
6455
14
Elaine G. Swanson
5029 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0171
Lot 19 & S. 1/2 of Lot 20, Block 4, Brookside Hgts
75
129.1
9682.5
15
C.J. Glenn & M.A. Tomlins
5028 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0065
Lot 10, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.2
6460
16
Arthur H. Osberg
5029 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0052
Lot 18 &19, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
100
129.2
12920
17
Patrick M. Simpkins
5037 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0051
Lot 17, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.3
6465
18
Albert I. Haemig, Etal
5032 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0066
Lot 11, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.3
6465
19
Peter J. Leckband
5033 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0072
Lot 18, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.3
6465
20
Jennifer L. Arndt
5041 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0050
Lot 16; Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.4
6470
21
K.R. Kammeier & S.M. Jack
5036 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0067
Lot 12, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
.129.4
6470
22
C.J. Brown & E.G. Olson
5037 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0071
Lot 17-& N. 1/2 of Lot 16, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
75
129.4
9705
23
T.& J. Benson
5040 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0068
Lot 13, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.5
6475
24
Ann A. Webster
5044 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0069
Lot 14,Block 4, Brookdside Hgts.
50
129.6
6480
25
D.L. & E.J. Taylor
5045 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0070
Lot 15 & S. 1/2 of Lot 16, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
75
129.6
9720
Lot 1 & N. 23' of Lot 2, incl Adj. 1/2 of Vac. St., Block
26
J. & N. Reed
5100 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0089
6, Brookside Hts
104
1130
13680.92
27 J.B.Schmieder & B.D.Wagner 5329 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0058
Lot 3, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
54
130
7020
28 Amy E. Lonsdorf 15333 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0059
Lot 4, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
54
130
7020
29 Patricia Mae Kerr Karasov 5001 Oxford ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0060
Lot 5, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
54
130
7020
30 Barbara J. Bowen 5332 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0020
S. 130' of Lot 8, Block 4, Beverly Hills
75
130
9750
31 S.I. & V.A. Berg 5328 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0021
S. 130' of Lot 9, Blcok 4, Beverly Hills
75
130
9750
32 Gary L. Brunkow, Eta[ 5101 Sk ine Dr.
29- 117 -21 -41 -0035
Lot 28 Skyline
95
130
19,785
33 Jeffrey T. Gargaro 5321 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0057
Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
109.1
130
14183
34 Roark Douglas Johnson 5401 Interlachen Blvd.
29- 117 -21 -41 -0059
Lot 1, Block 1, Warrens Addition
80
134.1
10728
35 Joan G. Pederson 5403 Interlachen Blvd.
29- 117 -21-41 -0060
Lot 2, Block 1, Warrens Addition
80
134.5
10760
36 D. C. Manion, Eta[ Address unassigned
29- 117 -21 -41 -0061
Outlot 1, Warrens Addition
46.5
134.8
6268.2
37 B.W. & K.L. Johnson 5016 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0081
Lot 4, Blcok 5, Brookside HGts.
50
136
6800
38 Marl ^^ Ruth Wilson 5020 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0082
Lot 5, Block 5, Brookside H ts.
50
1 36
6800
QeA Zo-F
3'3 E.T.
Elstad & K.K. Hussey 5024
L. Shjefte 5028
L. Prom 5032
& B.A. Beckman
Richard E. Rousseau
Vito V. Lo esio
Oxford Ave 28-
Oxford Ave. 28-
Oxford Ave. 28-
5036 Oxford Ave. 28-
5040 Oxford Ave. 28-
5044 Oxford Ave. 28-
5344 Interlachen Blvd. 28-
5340 Interlachen Blvd. 28-
5348 Hollywood Road 28-
5305 Hollywood Road
5311 Holl ood Road
5419 Interlachen Blvd.
5415 Interlachen Blvd.
5340,Holl ood Road
5319 Hollywood Road
5317 Holl ood Road
5105 Skyline Dr.
6 Orchard Lane
5109 Blossom Ct.
4816 Vandervork Ave.
4 Orchard Lane
5316 Interlachen Blvd.
5312 Interlachen Blvd.
5404. Interlachen Blvd.
5005 Skyline Drive
5405 Interlachen Blvd.
5324 Interlachen Blvd.
5320 Interlachen Blvd.
5332 Hollywood Road
5309 Hollywood Road
5017 Skyline Dr.
5017 Skyline Dr.
5113 Blossom Ct.
5400 Interlachen Blvd.
5 Orchard Lane
117 -21 -32 -0083 Lot
117 -21 -32 -0084 Lot
117 -21 -32 -0085 Lot
117 -21 -32 -0086 Lot
117 -21 -32 -0087 Lot
That
117 -21 -32 -0088 1/2
117 -21 -23 -0008 Lot
117 -21 -23 -0007
117 -21 -23 -0006
28- 117 -21 -23 -0015
28- 117 -21 -23 -0017
29- 117 -21-41 -0005
29- 117 -21-41 -0006
28- 117 -21 -23 -0005
28- 117 -21 -23 -0019
28- 117 -21 -23 -0018
29- 117 -21 -41 -0032
29- 117 -21 -14 -0024
29- 117 -21-41 -0031
28- 117 -21 -23 -0030
29- 117 -21 -14 -0025
28- 117 -21 -23 -0032
28- 117 -21 -23 -0031
29- 117 -21 -14 -0023
29- 117 -21 -41 -0007
29- 117 -21-41 -0002
28- 117 -21 -23 -0022
28- 117 -21 -23 -0023
28- 117 -21 -23 -0004
28- 117 -21 -23 -0016
29- 117 -21 -41 -0033
29- 117 -21-41 -0034
29- 117 -21-41 -0030
29- 117 -21 -14 -0022
29- 117 -21 -14 -0046
6, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
7, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
8, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
9, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
10 & N. 15 Ft. of Lot 11, Block 5, Brookside H
part of Lot 11 Lying S. of N. 15' including Adj
of vac st,Block 5, Brookside Hts
8, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Lot 7, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Lot 6, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Lot 2, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 5, Block 4, Beverly Hills (comer lot)
Lot 1 &Part of Lot3, Block 1,Hills Interlachen Add
Lot 2 & Part of Lot3, Blk 1, Hills Interlachen Add
Lots 4 &5 & Adj. 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Lot 7 & N. 10' of lots 8 &9, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 6; Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 25 Skyline
Lot 3, Block 1 Hilldale
Lot 24 Skyline
Lot 1, Block 1, Beverly Hills, 2nd Addition
Lot 4, Block 1 Hilldale
Lot 3 & W. 5' of Lot 2, Beverly Hills 2nd Addition
E.100' of Lot 2, Block 1, Beverly Hills 2nd Addition
Lot 2, Block 1 Hilldale
S. 120' of Lot 3, Blk 1, Hills Interlachen Addition
Part of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4
Lot 10, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 11, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 2 & Adj. 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Lots 3 & 4, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 26 Skyline
Lot 27 Skyline
Lot 23 Skyline
Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale
Lot 1,Replat of Lots 6 &7 &Part of Lot1,Blk 1 Hilldale
*
*
'
*
'
'
*
50
50
50
50
65
65
70.1
70.4
80
90
131
100
106.5
212
90
85
92
125
135
115
125
80
100
125
120
134.5
75.5
75.5
140
151
130
135
153
193.6
164
136
136
136
136
136
136
140
140
140.8
143.2
148
150
150
150
150.1
150.2
155
160
164
180
180
186.2
186.2
200
207.1
207.3
220
220
220
224.8
233
233
236
286
300
6800
6800
6800
6800
8840
8840
9814
9,769
11264
12888
18,689
15000
15975
34,290
13518
13175
15,735
22,921
22,638
20700
22500
14896
18620
25,297
24852
27881.85
16610
16610
36,265
33944.8
28,831
30,591
36,224
62,759
60,158
40 Delores
41 Steven
42 D.A.
43
44
45
Roy E.J. Puelston
46 J.L.
& M.J. Barnett
47
Kathleen Wasescha
48
Lynn Teschendorf
49
50
C.T. & R.M. Flynn
R.B. & E.A.F. Scott
51
Ma Ellen Pinkham
52
53
C.K. Bisson & R.R. Miller
Mark Carl Thiede, Etal
54
P. & I. Leenders
Grace Tull Mulcahy
M. Maciejewski & D. Linder
Fa L. Tessman
R.J. & K.J. Diehl
R.M. & A.H. Andre
D.A. & S.L. Austin
M.E. & N.B. Winter
C.T. & L.G. Dahl
S.B. Johansen & B.S. Brand
'D.C. Manion, Etal
M.D. & T.A. Johnson
Toni A. Gerst
W.B. & L.R. Bofenkamp
Dorothy J. Leming
Peter M. & Ellen B. Kaiser
Thomas J. Kalb, Etal
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
Timoth A. & Barbara F.Olson
72
Christina Ann Berenberg
73
Steven C. Moosbrugger, Etal
(Feet)
151.1
FT
=Deg)th
h (37 of 73)
136.0
(not inc luded in calcs)
Address unassigned
Address unassi ned
29- 117 -21 -14 -0021
29- 117 -21 -41 -0001
ond)
SE 1/4
'
250
50
330
524.2
107,736
*Steven C.Moosbrugger, Etal
*NSP
Comm 9689 - Lot Calm - --- width
Area From
Internet
Name
Address
PID No.
Legal
Width
Depth
Area
feet
feet
(sf)
1
D.C. Manion, Etal
Address unassigned
29- 117 -21-41 -0061
Outlot 1, Warrens Addition
46.5
134.8
6268.2
2
Mark S. Simmons
5017 Bedford ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0055
Lot 22, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
128.8
6440
3
Jan Blakely Holman
5021 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0054
Lot 21, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
128.9
6445
4
Steven Hansen, Etal.
5016 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0062
Lot 7, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
128.9
6445
5
Wayne B. Hierlmaier
5017 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0076
Lot 22, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
128.9
6445
6
D.C. & J.A. Lerum
5025 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0053
Lot 20, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
129
6450
7
Jo ce G. Repya
5020 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0063
Lot 8, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129
6450
8
Michael P. Makowski
5024 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0064
Lot 9, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.1
6455
9
C.J. Glenn & M.A. Tomlins
5028 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0065
Lot 10, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.2
6460
10
Patrick M. Simpkins
5037 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0051
Lot 17, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.3
6465
11
Albert I. Haemig, Etal
5032 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0066
Lot 11, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.3
6465
12
Peter J. Leckband
5033 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0072
Lot 18, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.3
6465
13
Jennifer L. Arndt
5041 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0050
Lot 16, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.4
6470
14
K.R. Kammeier & S.M. Jack
5036 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0067
Lot 12, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.4
6470
15
T.& J. Benson
5040 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0068
Lot 13, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
50
129.5
6475
16
Ann A. Webster
5044 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0069
Lot 14,Block 4, Brookdside Hgts.
50
129.6
6480
17
B.W. & K.L. Johnson
5016 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0081
Lot 4, Blcok 5, Brookside HGts.
50
136
6800
18
Marian Ruth Wilson
5020 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0082
Lot 5, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
50
136
6800
19
E.T. Elstad & K.K. Hussey
5024 Oxford Ave
28- 117 -21 -32 -0083
Lot 6, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
50
136
6800
20
Delores L. Shjefte
5028 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0084
Lot 7, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
50
136
6800
21
Steven L. Prom
5032 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0085
Lot 8, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
50
136
6800
22
D.A. & B.A. Beckman
5036 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0086
Lot 9, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
50
136
6800
23
J.B.Schmieder & B.D.Wagner
5329 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0058
Lot 3, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
54
130
7020
24
Amy E. Lonsdorf
5333 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0059
Lot 4, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
54
130
7020
25
Patricia Mae Kerr Karasov
5001 Oxford ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0060
Lot 5, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
54
130
7020
26
Deborah A. Hoffman
5013 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0056
Lot 23, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
54.7
128.8
7045.36
27
H.G. Wahlquist, Etal.
5012 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0061
Lot 6, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
54.8
128.8
7058.24
28
P. &L. Knaeble
5013 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0077
Lot 23, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
55.2
128.8
7109.76
29
Sandra K. Strom
5313 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0160
Lot 1, Block 1, Rowlands Addn.
65
108
7020
30
T.G. Peterson
5005 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0161
Lot 2, Block 1, Rowlands Addn.
65
108
7020
31
Richard E. Rousseau
5040 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0087
Lot 10 & N. 15 Ft. of Lot 11, Block 5, Brookside H
65
136
8840
That part of Lot 11 Lying S. of N. 15' including Adj
32 Vito V. Lopesio 5044 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0088
1/2 of vac st,Block 5, Brookside Hts
65
136
8840
33 Roy E.J. Puelston 5344 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0008
Lot 8, Block 1, Beverly Hills
70.1
140
9814
34 J.L. & M.J. Barnett 5340 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0007
Lot 7, Block 1, Beverly Hills
70.4
140
9,769
35 Judith J. Romine 5021 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0075
Lot 21 & N. 1/2 of Lot 20, Block 4, Brookside Hgts
75
129
9675
36 Elaine G. Swanson 5029 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0171
Lot 19 & S. 1/2 of Lot 20, Block 4, Brookside Hgts
75
129.1
9682.5
37 C.J. Brown & E.G. Olson 5037 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0071
Lot 17 & N. 1/2 of Lot 16, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
75
129.4
9705
38 D.L. & E.J. Taylor 5045 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0070
Lot 15 & S. 1/2 of Lot 16, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
75
129.6
9720
Barbara J. Bowen
S. I. & V.A. Berg
M.D. & T.A. Johnson
Toni A. Gerst
Roark Douglas Johnson
Joan G. Pederson
Kathleen Wasescha
D.A. & S.L. Austin
P. & I. Leenders.
Mark Carl Thiede, Etal
Grace Tully Mulcahy
Gary L. Brunkow, Etal
Arthur H. Osberg
R.B. & E.A.F. Scott
M.E. & N.B. Winter
5332 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0020
5328 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0021
5324 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0022
5320 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0023
5401 Interlachen Blvd.
29- 117 -21-41 -0059
5403 Interlachen Blvd.
29- 117 -21-41 -0060
5348 Hollywood Road
28- 117 -21 -23 -0006
5316 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0032
5317 Hollywood Road
28- 117 -21 -23 -0018
5319 Hollywood Road
28- 117 -21 -23 -0019
5305 Hollywood Road
28- 117 -21 -23 -0015
5105 Skyline Dr.
29- 117 -21-41 -0032
5101 Skyline Dr.
29- 117 -21 -41 -0035
5029 Bedford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0052
5419 Interlachen Blvd.
29- 117 -21-41 -0005
5312 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0031
55 J. & N. Reed
56 Mary Ellen Pinkham
57 Jeffre T. Gargaro
58 R.J. & K.J. Diehl
59 S.B. Johansen & B.S. Brand
60 R.M. & A.H. Andre
61 M. Maciejewski & D. Linder
62 C.T. & L.G. Dahl
63 Peter M. & Ellen B. Kaiser
64 C.T. & R.M. FI n
65 'D.C. Manion, Etal
66 Fay L. Tessman
67 Thomas J. Kalb, Etal
68 W.B. & L.R. Bofenkam
69 Doroth J. Leming
70 Timoth A. & Barbara F.Olson
71 Steven C. Moosbrugger, Etal
72 Christina Ann Berenberg
73 C.K. Bisson & R.R. Miller
5100 Oxford Ave.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0089
5415 Interlachen Blvd.
29- 117 -21 -41 -0006
5321 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0057
4816 Vandervork Ave.
28- 117 -21 -23 -0030
5005 Skyline Drive
29- 117 -21 -41 -0007
4 Orchard Lane
29- 117 -21 -14 -0025
6 Orchard Lane
29- 117 -21 -14 -0024
5404 Interlachen Blvd.
29- 117 -21 -14 -0023
5017 Skyline Dr.
5311 Hollywood Road
29- 117 -21-41 -0033
28- 117 -21 -23 -0017
5405? Interlachen Blv
29- 117 -21-41 -0002
5109 Blossom Ct.
29- 117 -21-41 -0031
5017 Skyline Dr.
5332 Hollywood Road
29- 117 -21-41 -0034
28- 117 -21 -23 -000
5309 Hollywood Road
5113 Blossom Ct.
28- 117 -21 -23 -001
29- 117 -21-41 -003
5 Orchard Lane
29- 117 -21 -14 -004
5400 Interlachen Blvd.
29- 117 -21 -14 -002
5340 Hollywood Road
28- 117 -21 -23 -0005
S. 130' of Lot 8, Block 4, Beverly hills
S 130' of Lot 9, Blcok 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 10, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 11, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 1, Block 1, Warrens Addition
Lot 2, Block 1, Warrens Addition
Lot 6, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Lot 3 &-W. 5' of Lot 2, Beverly Hills 2nd Addition
Lot 6, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 7 & N. 10' of lots 8 &9, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 2, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 25 Skyline
Lot 28 Skyline
Lot 18 &19, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 1 & Part of Lot3, Block 1,Hills Interlachen Add
E.100' of Lot 2, Block 1, Beverly Hills 2nd Addition
Lot 1 & N. 23' of Lot 2, incl Adj. 1/2 of Vac. St., BlocH
6, Brookside Hts
Lot 2 & Part of Lot3, Blk 1, Hills Interlachen Add
Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 1, Block 1, Beverly Hills, 2nd Addition
S. 120' of Lot 3, Blk 1, Hills Interlachen Addition
Lot 4, Block 1 Hilldale
Lot 3, Block 1 Hilldale
Lot 2, Block 1 Hilldale
Lot 26 Skyline
Lot 5, Block 4, Beverly Hills (corner lot)
Part of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4
Lot 24 Skyline
Lot 27 Skyline
4 Lot 2 & Adj. 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 1, Beverly Hills
6 Lots 3 & 4, Block 4, Beverly Hills
0 Lot 23 Skyline
6 Lot 1,Replat of Lots 6 &7 &Part of Lot1,Blk 1 Hilldale
2 Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale
Lots 4 &5 & Adi. 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Mean Lot Width
Median Lot Width
*Steven C.Moosbrugger, Etal 1 Address unassigned 29- 117 -21 -14 -0021 Lot C Hilldale
*NSP jAddress unassigned 129- 117 -21-41 -0001 (Part of NE 1/4 of
of
1/4
75
75
75.5
75.5
80
80
80
80
85
90
90
92
95
100
100
100
105.4
106.5
109.1
115
120
125
125
125
130
131
134.5
135
135
140
151
153
164
193.6
212
130
130
220
220
134.1
134.5
140.8
186.2
150.2
150.1
143.2
155
130
129.2
150
186.2
129.8
150
130
180
207.1
180
160
200
233
148
207.3
164
233
220
224.8
300
286
150
82.5
75.0
250 330
50 524.2
Comm 9689 - Lot Calcs - -- -area
Name
D.C. Manion, Etal
Mark S. Simmons
Jan Blakely Holman
Steven Hansen, Etal.
Wayne B. Hierlmaier
D.C. & J.A. Lerum
Joyce G. Repya
Michael P. Makowski
C.J. Glenn & M.A. Tomlins
Patrick M. Simpkins
Albert I. Haemig, Etal
Peter J. Leckband
Jennifer L. Arndt
K.R. Kammeier & S.M. Jack
T.& J. Benson
Ann A. Webster
B.W. & K.L. Johnson
Marian Ruth Wilson
E.T. Elstad & K.K. Hussey
Delores L. Shjefte
Steven L. Prom
D.A. & B.A. Beckman
J.B.Schmieder & B.D.Wagn
Amy E. Lonsdorf
Patricia Mae Kerr Karasov
Sandra K. Strom
T.G. Peterson
I Deborah A. Hoffman
1 H.G. Wahlquist, Etal.
P. &L. Knaeble
I Richard E. Rousseau
32 Vito V. Lopesio
33 Judith J. Romine
34 Elaine G. Swanson
35 C.J. Brown & E.G. Olson
36 1 D. L. & E.J. Taylor
S.I 9. V.A.
Address
5017 Bedford ave.
5021 Bedford Ave.
5016 Bedford Ave.
5017 Oxford Ave.
5025 Bedford Ave.
5020 Bedford Ave.
5024 Bedford Ave.
5028 Bedford Ave.
5037 Bedford Ave.
5032 Bedford Ave.
5033 Oxford Ave.
5041 Bedford Ave.
5036 Bedford Ave.
5040 Bedford Ave.
5044 Bedford Ave.
5016 Oxford Ave.
5020 Oxford Ave.
5024 Oxford Ave
5028 Oxford Ave.
5032 Oxford Ave.
5036 Oxford Ave.
5329 Interlachen Blvd.
5333 Interlachen Blvd.
5001 Oxford ave.
5313 Interlachen Blvd.
5005 Bedford Ave.
5013 Bedford Ave.
5012 Bedford Ave.
5013 Oxford Ave.
5040 Oxford Ave.
5044 Oxford Ave.
5021 Oxford Ave.
5029 Oxford Ave.
5037 Oxford Ave.
5045 Oxford Ave.
PID No.
29- 117 -21-41 -0061
28- 117 -21 -32 -0055
28- 117 -21 -32 -0054
28- 117 -21 -32 -0062
28- 117 -21 -32 -0076
28- 117 -21 -32 -0053
28- 117 -21 -32 -0063
28- 117 -21 -32 -0064
28- 117 -21 -32 -0065
28- 117 -21 -32 -0051
28- 117 -21 -32 -0066
28- 117 -21 -32 -0072
28- 117 -21 -32 -0050
28- 117 -21 -32 -0067
28- 117 -21 -32 -0068
28- 117 -21 -32 -0069
28- 117 -21 -32 -0081
28- 117 -21 -32 -0082
28- 117 -21 -32 -0083
28- 117 -21 -32 -0084
28- 117 -21 -32 -0085
28- 117 -21 -32 -0086
28- 117 -21 -32 -0058
28- 117 -21 -32 -0059
28- 117 -21 -32 -0060
28- 117 -21 -32 -0160
28- 117 -21 -32 -0161
28- 117 -21 -32 -0056
28- 117 -21 -32 -0061
28- 117 -21 -32 -0077
28- 117 -21 -32 -0087
5328 Interlachen Blvd.
Outlot 1, Warrens Addition
Lot 22, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 21, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 7, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 22, Block 4, Brookside Hgts,
Lot 20, Block 3, Brookside Hgts,
Lot 8, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 9, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 10, Block 4, Brookside Hgts
Lot 17, Block 3, Brookside Hgts
Lot 11, Block 4, Brookside Hgts
Lot 18, Block 4, Brookside Hgts
Lot 16, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 12, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 13, Block 4, Brookside Hgts,
Lot 14,Block 4, Brookdside Hgts.
Lot 4, Blcok 5, Brookside HGts.
Lot 5, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 6, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 7, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 8, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 9, Block 5, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 3, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 4, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 5, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 1, Block 1, Rowlands Addn.
Lot 2, Block 1, Rowlands Addn.
Lot 23, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 6, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 23, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 10 & N. 15 Ft. of Lot 11, Block 5, Brookside H
That part of Lot 11 Lying S. of N. 15' including Adj
1/2 of vac st,Block 5, Brookside Hts
Lot 21 & N. 1/2 of Lot 20, Block 4, Brookside Hgt;
Lot 19 & S. 1/2 of Lot 20, Block 4, Brookside Hgts
Lot 17 & N. 1/2 of Lot 16, Block 4, Brookside Hgt:
Lot 15 & S. 1/2 of Lot 16, Block 4, Brookside Hgt:
28- 117 -21 -32 -0088
28- 117 -21 -32 -0075
28- 117 -21 -32 -0171
28- 117 -21 -32 -0071
28- 117 -21 -32 -0070
17 -21 -23 -0021 IS. 130' of Lot 9, Blcok 4, Beverly Hills
Area From
Internet
Width
46.5
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
54
54
54
65
65
54.7
54.8
55.2
65
134.8
128.8
128.9
128.9
128.9
129
129
129.1
129.2
129.3
129.3
129.3
129.4
129.4
129.5
136
136
136
136
136
130
130
130
108
108
128.8
128.8
128.8
136
65 136
75 129
75 129.1
75 129.4
75 129.6
75 1 130
/eFe
Area
6440
6445
6445
6450
6450
6460
6465
6465
6465
6470
6470
6475
6480
6800
6800
7020
7020
7020
7020
7020
7045.36
7109.76
8840
8840
9675
9682.5
9705
9720
9jeeA 2A
39 J.L.
& M.J. Barnett 5340
Interlachen Blvd. 28-
Interlachen Blvd. 28-
Interlachen Blvd. 29-
Interlachen Blvd. 29-
Hollywood Road 28-
Hollywood Road 28-
Hollywood Road 28-
5305 Hollywood Road 28-
5029 Bedford Ave. 28-
117 -21 -23 -0007 Lot
117 -21 -23 -0008 Lot
117 -21-41 -0059 Lot
117 -21-41 -0060 Lot
117 -21 -23 -0006 Lot
117 -21 -23 -0018 Lot
117 -21 -23 -0019 Lot
117 -21 -23 -0015 Lot
117 -21 -32 -0052
7, Block 1, Beverly Hills
8, Block 1, Beverly Hills
1, Block 1, Warrens Addition
2, Block 1, Warrens Addition
6, Block 1, Beverly Hills
6, Block 4, Beverly Hills
7 & N. 10' of lots 8 &9, Block 4, Beverly Hills
2, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 18 &19, Block 3, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 1 & N. 23' of Lot 2, incl Adj. 1/2 of Vac. St., Block
*
70.4
70.1
80
80
80
85
90
90
100
140
140
.134.1
134.5
140.8
150.2
.150.1
143.2
129.2
9,769
9814
10728
10760
11264
12758.5
12888
12888
12920
40 Roy
E.J. Puelston 5344
Roark Douglas Johnson 5401
G. Pederson 5403
Kathleen Wasescha 5348
P. & I. Leenders 5317
Mark Carl Thiede, Etal 5319
Lynn Teschendorf
Arthur H. Osberg
41
42 Joan
43
44
45
46
47
48 J.
& N. Reed
gD.A.& Gargaro
. Austin
.F. Scott
ly Mulcah
Mary Ellen Pinkham
Toni A. Gerst
M.D. & T.A. Johnson
M.E. & N.B. Winter
C.T. & R.M. Flynn
Ga L. Brunkow, Etal
R.J. & K.J. Diehl
M. Maciejewski & D. Linder
R.M. & A.H. Andre
Fay L. Tessman
S.B. Johansen & B.S. Brand
C.T. & L.G. Dahl
*D.C. Manion, Etal
Peter M. & Ellen B. Kaiser
Thomas J. Kalb, Etal
Dorothy J. Leming
C.K. Bisson & R.R. Miller
Timothy A. & Barbara F.Olson
W.B. & L.R. Bofenkamp
Steven C. Moosbrugger, Etal
Christina Ann Berenberg
5100 Oxford Ave.
5321 Interlachen Blvd.
5316 Interlachen Blvd.
5419 Interlachen Blvd.
5105 Skyline Dr.
5415 Interlachen Blvd.
5320 Interlachen Blvd.
5324 Interlachen Blvd.
5312 Interlachen Blvd.
5311 Hollywood Road
5101 Skyline Dr.
4816 Vandervork Ave.
6 Orchard Lane
4 Orchard Lane
5109 Blossom Ct.
5005 Skyline Drive
5404 Interlachen Blvd.
5405 Interlachen Blvd.
5017 Skyii ne Dr.
5017 Skyline Dr.
15309 Hollywood Road
15340 Hollywood Road
15113 Blossom Ct.
5332 Holl ood Road
5 or Lane
5400 Interlachen Blvd.
28- 117 -21 -32 -0089
28- 117 -21 -32 -0057
28- 117 -21 -23 -0032
29- 117 -21 -41 -0005
29-117 -21-41 -0032
29- 117 -21 -41 -0006
28- 117 -21 -23 -0023
28- 117 -21 -23 -0022
28- 117 -21 -23 -0031
28- 117 -21 -23 -0017
29- 117 -21-41 -0035
28- 117 -21 -23 -0030
29- 117 -21 -14 -0024
29- 117 -21 -14 -0025
29- 117 -21-41 -0031
29- 117 -21-41 -0007
29- 117 -21 -14 -0023
29- 117 -21-41 -0002
29- 117 -21-41 -0033
29- 117 -21-41 -0034
28- 117 -21 -23 -0016
28- 117 -21 -23 -0005
29- 117 -21-41 -0030
28- 117 -21 -23 -0004
29- 117 -21 -14 -0046
29- 117 -21 -14 -0022
6, Brookside Hts
Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Brookside Hgts.
Lot 3 & W. 5' of Lot 2, Beverl Hills 2nd Addition
Lot 1 & Part of Lot3,.Block 1,Hills Interlachen Add
Lot 25 Skyline
Lot 2 & Part of Lot3, Blk 1, Hills Interlachen Add
Lot 11, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lot 10, Block 4, Beverly Hills
E.100' of Lot 2, Block 1, Beverly Hills 2nd Addition
Lot 5, Block 4, Beverly Hills (corner lot)
Lot 28 Skyline
Lot 1, Block 1, Beverly Hills, 2nd Addition
Lot 3, Block 1 Hilldale
Lot 4, Block 1 Hilldale
Lot 24 Skyline
S. 120' of Lot 3, Blk 1, Hills Interlachen Addition
Lot 2, Block 1 Hilldale
Part of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4
Lot 26 Skyline
Lot 27 Skyline
Lots 3 & 4, Block 4, Beverly Hills
Lots 4 &5 & Adj. 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Lot 23 Skyline
Lot 2 & Adj. 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 1, Beverly Hills
Lot 1,Replat of Lots 6 &7 &Part of Lot1,Blk 1 Hilldale
Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
105.4
109.1
80
100
92
106.5
75.5
75.5
100
131
95
115
125
125
135
120
125
134.5
130
135
151
212
153
140
164
193.6
129.8
130
186.2
150
155
150
220
220
186.2
148
130
180
160
180
164
207.1
200
207.3
233
233
224.8
150
236
220
300
286
13680.92
14183
14896
15000
15,735
15975
16610
16610
18620
18,689
19,785
20700
21,921
22500
22,638
24852
25,297
27881.85
28,831
30,591
33944.8
34,290
36,224
36,265
60,158
62,759
J50
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
Mean Lot Area (SF)
114365.07
Median Lot Area (37 of 73)
9750
i
*Steven C.Moosbrugger, Etal
*NSP
Address unassigned
jAddress unassigned
29- 117 -21 -14 -0021
29- 117 -21 -41 -0001
Lot C Hilldale (pond)
Part of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4
*
250
50
330
524.2
107,736
8 s o Y 8 m� DR
OXFORD AVE
8$
2
2
v
1
BEDFORD
s s
S 3 y tl a a is i � 8 a
g
s8
4
s8
s8
4
s
4
4
4
S
E
g
p
g
a
e
w
8
R
8
8$
2
2
v
1
BEDFORD
s s
S 3 y tl a a is i � 8 a
WILL AVE
S
4
4
4
4
4
a
a
8
9
8
t
6
g
p
g
a
a
¢
§
R
a
WILL AVE
S
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
9
4
R
!
a
a
d
a
a
¢
§
9
a
� 88 gg gg gg gg n
HANKERSON AVE S
HOLLYWOOD RD
o�
CIRCL
v
VANDERVORK
S
a
�Be
BS
g
9
1
�
R
!
a
a
d
a
a
¢
§
9
a
8
8
v
VANDERVORK
2 a
i
v
0
E
a
O
N
O
Z
z
= 9 9
y
J
S
a
�Be
BS
g
9
1
�
a
a
V
2 a
i
v
0
E
a
O
N
O
Z
z
= 9 9
y
J
F1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2000
5:30 P.M. EDINA COUNCIL CHAMBERS
4801 WEST 50T" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Gordon Johnson, David Byron, John
Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, Helen McClelland,
Geof Workinger, Charles Ingwalson and
Lorelei Bergman
MEMBERS ABSENT: David Runyan
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
The minutes of the November 1, 2000, meeting were filed and corrected
as recommended by Commissioner Ingwalson.
II. OLD BUSINESS:
Preliminary Plat
JMS, Inc.
S -00 -5 Brookside Heights
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the Planning Commission reviewed
a five lot, zero lot line development of this property at their November 1, 2000,
meeting. That proposal was viewed under multi - family zoning standards, and
would have required a rezoning of the property. After hearing testimony and
comments from the Commission the request was withdrawn. The proponent has
now submitted a revised plan which illustrates a 4 lot conventional plat. The new
plan is a Single Dwelling Unit subdivision which does not require a rezoning.
Mr. Larsen concluded although all of the lots require some variances, this
is a development that fits its neighborhood. The most important measure, lot
width, fits the development pattern in the Brookside Heights neighborhood. The
numbers are skewed because this property is at the edge of the neighborhood
causing the larger lots to the north and west to become part of the formula. The
best way to ensure that the new houses are compatible in size and scale with
existing homes is to provide a similar lot width. The one and a half story homes
the developer intends to build would be compatible. Staff recommends
preliminary plat approval, including the requested variances conditioned on:
1. Final Plat approval
2. Subdivision dedication
3. Watershed District permits
The proponent, Mr. Jeff Schoenwetter was present to respond to
questions. Interested neighbors were also present.
Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if he knows the age of the
homes build on Interlachen Boulevard at Oxford Avenue. Mr. Larsen said he
believes those homes were constructed in the 1970's.
Commissioner McClelland commented in reviewing the revised plans she
found it curious to note the smallest lot is proposed to be located on the corner.
Commissioner McClelland said in her opinion a corner lot needs to be larger
allowing for greater setbacks from the side street.
Commissioner Bergman asked Mr. Larsen if he knows the setback of the
house directly to the east (fronting Interlachen Boulevard) of the subject site. Mr.
Larsen said he believes the setback of that house in 70 feet. Mr. Larsen asked
the Commission to note because of the vacated alley and the 50 foot NSP
easement that house is not contiguous to the subject site and therefor is not
used to establish setback.
Commissioner Workinger asked if the current home fronts Interlachen
Boulevard. Mr. Larsen clarified there are two homes involved with this process,
the home located at 5343 Interlachen Boulevard fronts Interlachen Boulevard,
and the home located at 5012 Oxford Avenue fronts Oxford Avenue.
Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if he could explain the required
setbacks for50 foot lots. Mr. Larsen said on lots less than 75 feet in width the
side street setback is 15 feet, the rearyard setback is 25 feet, and the interior
sideyard setback is "5 feet. Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note for an
interior sideyard setback the sideyard setback shall be increased by 6 inches for
each foot the building height exceeds 15 feet.
Mr. Schoenwetter addressed the Commission and explained he has been
in the development business for 15 years and he believes the concept he is
presenting this evening suits this neighborhood. Continuing, Mr. Schoenwetter
said the proposal allows for choice in home style while maintaining the character
of the immediate Brookside Heights neighborhood. Mr. Schoenwetter said the
main floor of each house will be around 1300.square feet, and if a one and 1/2
story house is selected an additional. 800 square feet can be added. Mr.
Schoenwetter added if property owners choose a finished basement that would
2
l;
roughly add an additional 1200 square feet to each house style. Mr.
Schoenwetter told the Commission in his opinion the market is ready for this
style of development, adding he believes the proposed homes will sell very
quickly.
Commissioner Ingwalson asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he has set a price
range for the proposed homes. Mr. Schoenwetter said the homes will range in
price from the low 300's to 500 thousand dollars.
Commissioner Bergman asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he has picked a house
style for the corner lot. Mr. Schoenwetter said the style of all homes will be
picked by the client. Commissioner Bergman questioned exterior building
materials. Mr. Schoenwetter responded the client can request different exterior
materials, but he believes most will be some form of stucco /brick or shakes /brick,
etc.
Commissioner Swenson inquired if this is considered a single lot
subdivision. Mr. Larsen said that is correct. The proposal is now for single
family detached, not a PRD zoning as originally proposed.
Mr. Miller, 5340 Hollywood Road, addressed the Commission and
informed them he lives within the 500 foot neighborhood. Mr. Miller said he
believes what is proposed is a high quality project, but in his opinion it belongs
somewhere else. Mr. Miller asked the Commission to reject the subdivision
request, adding he believes this corner relates more to the homes along
Interlachen Boulevard, and not to the homes that fall within the Brookside
Heights plat.
Mr. Peter Leenders, 5317 Hollywood Road, told the Commission he
believes if this proposal were to be approved the general appearance of the
neighborhood would change. Mr. Leenders said the subject property relates to
the properties along Interlachen Boulevard, and the majority of homes along
Interlachen Boulevard maintain large frontyard setbacks with larger lots.
Concluding, Mr. Leenders invited the Commission to read the setback
requirements from the Zoning Ordinance, and acknowledge it will be difficult for
the corner house to maintain the proper setbacks. Concluding, Mr. Leenders
said more neighbors would have appeared at this hearing but no notification was
received from the City.
Mr. Larsen explained the City of Edina does not notify residents of a future
subdivision at the Planning Commission level. The sign is the first notification to
the neighbors that a subdivision has been requested. In the subdivision
ordinance the City recommends that the developer contact residents that fall
within 500 feet of the subject site explaining to residents a hearing before the
Commission will occur.
3
A resident of 5332 Hollywood Road, told the Commission the proponent
has reduced his original plan from 5 lots to 4, and suggested that the
Commission only consider a three lot plat. He stated in his opinion "if they build
it, they will come "! Three lots is enough!
Ms. Carolyn Bisson, 5340 Hollywood Road, told the Commission in her
opinion this proposal will have a negative impact on the area. She said
Interlachen Boulevard has a "country lane feeling ", and this proposal will detract
from that. Continuing, Ms. Bisson said in 1987 her property suffered from sewer
backup and adding four new homes will increase the probability that it could
happen again. Ms. Bisson said the homes within this area are spaced
adequately, with many developed with combined lots. Ms. Bisson said this
proposal, in her opinion, crunches four houses into an area that is to tight. Ms.
Bisson asked Mr. Schoenwetter how close he lives to his neighbors.
Ms. Thiede, 5319 Hollywood Road, pointed out to the Commission all the
homes in her neighborhood have spacious lots adding it is a very charming
neighborhood of single and combined lots.
A resident of 5324 Interlachen Boulevard said if the property is developed
as presented it will not reflect the true character of the entire 500 foot
neighborhood.
Ms. D. Strege, 5113 Oxford Avenue, told the Commission her lot is 88 feet
in width, adding she wants some assurance the houses built will reflect the
character of her neighborhood.
Mr. Jeff Bisson, 2650 California Street, N.E., told the Commission he grew
up in Edina and cautioned the Commission to carefully consider this proposal to
ensure that Edina continues to remain a premier City for future homeowners.
Pat Karasoz, 5001 Oxford Avenue, told the Commission she lives directly
across from the subject property, and pointed out she has had to endure for the
past 12 years the continued disrepair of this site. Ms. Karasoz told the
Commission she fully supports the request' as presented. She said what is
proposed appeals to her. Ms. Karasoz commented that she is in the minority this
evening by supporting the proposal, but stressed she looks out of her window at
this site everyday. Ms. Karasoz asked the Commission to note she purchased
her home in a neighborhood of 50 foot lots, adding her lot is 50 feet wide. Ms.
Karasoz said if she wanted a larger lot, and larger home she would have moved
into a different neighborhood. Ms. Karasoz said she loves the homes in her
neighborhood, she believes the proposed homes are a good "fit" and supports
the proposal as presented.
Mr. Thiede, 5319 Hollywood Road, said in his opinion the proposed
homes will be too close and appear "townhouse like" especially with the garage
4
the dominant front feature. Mr. Thiede said in his opinion this design concept is
totally out of character with the neighborhood.
Mr. Leender addressed the Commission and told them he has carefully
reviewed the numbers presented by the proponent and does not agree with
them. Continuing, Mr. Leender said the proponent has indicated 50 feet is the
appropriate lot width, and when he calculated the lot width he came up with a 75,
foot.width. He stressed to the Commission he does not agree with the numbers
presented by the proponent.
Chairman Johnson questioned if the figures presented are correct. Mr.
Larsen said if there is any question that the figures are incorrect the meeting
should not continue., Mr. Larsen said the figures presented to staff are from a
registered land surveyor and they indicate a median lot width of 50 feet.
Commissioner Byron interjected and said if Mr. Larsen feels the numbers
are incorrect maybe this should be rejected as suggested by Mr. Larsen.
Mr. Schoenwetter interjected that in his opinion the homes presented are
not townhouses, they are single family detached `homes. He pointed out'he is
only proposing.one more house; where three are allowed. In response to the
mention of potential sewer problems Mr. Schoenwetter said the subject sites are
platted for three houses with three sewer hookups, reiterating the proposal only
adds one more home. In conclusion, Mr. Schoenwetter said the 50 foot lot width
reflects the size of the lots in the Brookside Heights neighborhood.
A discussion ensued regarding the figures presented from the developer
to the Commission as they relate to neighborhood medians. Mr. Schoenwetter
presented Mr. Larsen with a copy of the plat as prepared by the registered land
surveyor. Mr. Larsen indicated the plat depicts a 50 foot lot width. Continuing,
Mr. Larsen said he has no reason not to believe the numbers supplied by the
registered land surveyor.
Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Larsen if the lot widths that ate presented
are 50 feet is a variance still required. Mr. Larsen said variances can be granted
at the subdivision level.
Commissioner Bergman said her concern is with the corner lot and the
potential house setback from Interlachen Boulevard. Commissioner McClelland
interjected and agreed with Commissioner Bergman's concern. She suggested
platting the largest lot on the corner, not the smallest as proposed in the plan
presented.
Commissioner Ingwalson said he believes he understands how the
Ordinance reads but questioned if the corner lot will require a frontyard setback
variance from Interlachen Boulevard. Mr. Larsen said a variance will not be
W
t_
required because a vacated alley and a 50 foot NSP easement separates the
subject property from the next house on Interlachen Boulevard. Commissioner
Ingwalson asked Mr. Larsen if he is comfortable with the calculations.
Mr. Larsen said he has no reason to suspect the numbers are wrong. Mr.
Larsen stated he supports the proposal as presented because in his opinion this
development relates more to the homes within the Brookside Heights
neighborhood, not the properties across Interlachen Boulevard. Mr. Larsen, said
his opinion is subjective pointing out he supports the concept of smaller homes
and smaller lots on this site. He acknowledged not everyone may agree with his
recommendation.
Commissioner Workinger acknowledged Edina is a community with a
need for transitional housing, adding he cannot support the proposal as
presented
Commissioner Bergman said she would like to see this proposal work.
She said she wants the corner lot to be the larger lot, and the proposed house to
be setback as far as possible from Interlachen Boulevard. Commissioner
Bergman said that while she be Interlachen Boulevard is a lovely street in
her opinion it is not a country lane, it is a collector street, and she believes
houses fronting Oxford Avenue with driveways on Oxford Avenue are the best
solution for this site.
Commissioner McClelland said in her opinion this proposal better suits the
Brookside Heights neighborhood, u ted onethe comerltof Interlachen. nand Oxford .s
suggestion that the house cons
maintain the deepest setback possible and be single story.
Commissioner Byron asked the developer if he is comfortable with,
changing the plat to reflect the larger lot on Interlachen Boulevard. Mr.
Schoenwetter said he has no problem developing the property as suggested by
the Commission. He said the corner lot will be the largest lot with the suggestion
of a rambler constructed on this lot.
Commissioner Byron said he believes everyone agrees this is a unique
location, and acknowledged the difference in the neighborhoods divided by
Interlachen Boulevard. He pointed out across Interlachen Boulevard the lots are
large (over 50 feet in width), but in the Brookside Heights neighborhoods the
majority of the lots are 50 feet in width. Commissioner Byron said he tends to
support the planner's belief that it is important the houses constructed "fit the -
neighborhood" south of Interlachen Boulevard. Commissioner Byron agreed
change is never welcome and is difficult for everyone concerned. Continuing,
Commissioner Byron said a majority of people visit the Commission for the first
time when something happens in their neighborhood that results in a change.
Commissioner Byron said the Commission tries very hard to blend a proposal
R
r
into the neighborhood and entire community, adding it has been very rare that a
resident has come back before the Commission stating what was approved
devalued properties.
Commissioner Byron moved to recommend subdivision approval subject
to final plat approval, subdivision dedication, watershed district permits, and that
the house on the corner lot of Interlachen Boulevard and Oxford Avenue be
limited to one story, and be 50+ feet in width.
Commissioner Ingwalson commented that he knows by the comments
thus far that the majority of residents that spoke this evening appear to live
across Interlachen Boulevard, and have indicated they do not support the
proposal as presented. Commissioner Ingwalson pointed out larger lots are not
always the answer. He explained the way the market is moving larger lots mean
larger homes and in this neighborhood of smaller lots and homes, it is very
possible larger homes would be out of character.
Commissioner Lonsbury said this is a difficult decision and the
Commission needs to consider this carefully. All decisions also must be
considered with the community in mind. Commissioner Lonsbury asked Mr.
Larsen if Mr. Hoffman, City Engineer will look at the sewer /water run -off situation.
Mr. Larsen said this proposal will be completely reviewed by the City Engineering
Department and the proposal will be constructed according to engineering
standards. Mr. Larsen said this proposal will also go forward to both the
Minnehaha and Nine Mile Creek watershed districts for their input.
Commissioner Lonsbury seconded the motion. Ayes, Lonsbury, Byron,
McClelland, Bergman, Ingwalson, Johnson. Nays, Swenson and Workinger.
Commissioner Swenson commented she cannot support the proposal at
this time because she has a concern the numbers may not be correct.
Motion carried. 6 -2.
III. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Jackie Hoogenakker
7
EDINA ZONING BOARD
NOVEMBER 29, 2000
Preliminary Plat
JMS, Inc.
S -00 -5 Brookside Heights
The Planning Commission reviewed a five lot, zero lot line development of
this property at their November 1, 2000, meeting. That proposal was viewed
under multi - family zoning standards, and would have required a rezoning of the
property. After hearing testimony and comments from the Commission the
request was withdrawn. The proponent has now submitted a revised plan which
illustrates a 4 lot conventional plat. The new plan is a Single Dwelling Unit
subdivision which does not require a rezoning.
Lots within the 500 foot Neighborhood surrounding the proposed
subdivision have the following dimensions and areas.
Lot Width
50 feet
Lot Depth
136 feet
Lot Area
6,728 sq. ft.
Lots within the proposed subdivision have the following dimensions and areas.
Lot 1
48.69 feet*
133 feet*
6,493 sq. ft.*
Lot 2
50 feet
133 feet*
6,659 sq. ft.*
Lot 3
50 feet
133 feet*
6,659 sq. ft.*
Lot 4
50 feet
132 feet*
6,638 sq. ft.*
* requires variance
One lot, Lot 1, requires a lot width variance and all lots require lot depth
and lot area variances.
The house pads illustrated on the preliminary plat represent the house
designs that the proponent showed the Commission at the November 1, 2000,
meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Although all of the lots require some variances, this is a development that
fits its neighborhood. The most important measure, lot width, fits the
development pattern in the Brookside Heights neighborhood. The numbers are
skewed because this property is at the edge of the neighborhood causing the
larger lots to the north and west to become part of the formula. The best way to
ensure that the new houses are compatible in size and scale with existing homes
is to provide a similar lot width. The one and a half story homes the developer
intends to build would be compatible. Staff recommends preliminary plat
approval, including the requested variances conditioned on:
1. Final Plat approval
2. Subdivision dedication
3. Watershed District permits
1 I
, I
I
I
INTERLACHEN BLVD \
I
1
_ I
y
i
I \
T
ch
O 1 O
O _
9311 37
n
__935 -"
1 11 3y s 1
1
1 A - 1
i 11 11 1 •per _
co
I 100• -24- CPE ` CA
I •�` (RUNOF_� STORatii) W '
. « i
I____ ____ ♦ � a 939. Yr -_ `
` 012
i I _ ` ♦ __s- 1 INLET
HO
- --
s 4
I � ` i 1 N IY% � ` •
i F` I) m P 1 � �♦♦P �� a_
CD
I 1
1 1 1
O v�
_ 1
RE41NING WAIL
11 1 I I
I 1 I I♦ __
I I 1 I 1
_ _ I
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED
MTJ BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT Roger A. Anderson &Associates Inc.
1 AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENONEER
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N CONSULTANTS _
PSH
BY. R A. ANDERSON. P.E. 7416 WAYZATA BOUIBNARD. SURE 107 MINNEAPOU9. 101 66428 TEL (262) 646 -7096 PAX (952) 546 -
DATE OCTOBER 13. 2000 REG. NO. 13659
�� ♦ 9�
s
r ;
100• -24" CPE
(WJNOFF STORAGE)
C4 .y
♦
`y
I , ` ♦, � h r
♦101
�♦
,1
F
i t 24' CPE
:` I
,
______NO(F STORAGE} `
� ' �
,
1 `<
1 =� p � \`.934.9 s♦
,
/
.D ,
I I
EX. F HOUSE i `
I %
1
1 p IV43
; ;
_ I
y
i
I \
T
ch
O 1 O
O _
9311 37
n
__935 -"
1 11 3y s 1
1
1 A - 1
i 11 11 1 •per _
co
I 100• -24- CPE ` CA
I •�` (RUNOF_� STORatii) W '
. « i
I____ ____ ♦ � a 939. Yr -_ `
` 012
i I _ ` ♦ __s- 1 INLET
HO
- --
s 4
I � ` i 1 N IY% � ` •
i F` I) m P 1 � �♦♦P �� a_
CD
I 1
1 1 1
O v�
_ 1
RE41NING WAIL
11 1 I I
I 1 I I♦ __
I I 1 I 1
_ _ I
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED
MTJ BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT Roger A. Anderson &Associates Inc.
1 AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENONEER
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N CONSULTANTS _
PSH
BY. R A. ANDERSON. P.E. 7416 WAYZATA BOUIBNARD. SURE 107 MINNEAPOU9. 101 66428 TEL (262) 646 -7096 PAX (952) 546 -
DATE OCTOBER 13. 2000 REG. NO. 13659
DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2000,7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
4801 WEST 50T" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Acting Chair, David Runyan, Charles Ingwalson, Geof Workinger,
Helen McClelland, Ann Swenson, John Lonsbury, Lorelei Bergman
and David Byron
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Gordon Johnson
STAFF PRESENT:
Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
The minutes of the August 30, 2000, meeting were filed as submitted.
II. NEW BUSINESS:
Z -00-4 JMS - INTERLACHEN OF EDINA
JEFF AND NANCY SCHOENWETTER
LOTS 1, 2, 3, BLOCK 5 BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS
5012 OXFORD AVENUE
5343 INTERLACHEN BOULEVARD
Mr. Larsen informed the Board the subject property comprises 3 single
dwelling lots all of which are zoned R -1, Single Dwelling Unit district. There are
2 houses located on the properties. Total area of the 3 lots is 0.61 acres, or
26,572 square feet. The Comprehensive Plan designates the properties as
Single Family.
The City has, received a request to redevelop the property with a five unit,
zero lot line development. The proposal requires a rezoning of the property to a
multi - family district, in this case the district would be PRD -3. PRD -3 is
considered medium density and would allow townhouses and apartment/
condominium buildings, as well as zero lot line homes. The zoning ordinance
requires a lot area of 4,400 square feet per unit in the PRD -3 district. The
proposed plan would comply with the density requirement in the PRD -3 district.
Mr. Larsen explained the proposed plan is not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, and is not consistent with existing development in the
neighborhood. In concept the proposal is similar to the zero lot line development
along the northern portion of Malibu Drive... The difference is that the Malibu land
was designated and zoned for multi - family use.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends denial of the proposed rezoning
based on inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. I would, however,
support a single family redevelopment of these properties. There is enough
width to the site to have a 53 foot wide lot at the corner of Oxford and
Interlachen and three 50 foot lots to the north. Such a layout would be
consistent with the neighborhood and would comply with neighborhood median
lot width of 50 feet.
Mr. Jeff Schoenwetter, JMS Homes was present to respond to questions.
Mr. Schoenwetter introduced himself and informed the Commission he is
a lifelong resident of Edina. He said he has studied a number of design plans for
zero lot line developments and that study resulted in the proposal before the
Commission this evening. Mr. Schoenwetter presented renderings of the
proposal including individual home designs. Continuing, Mr. Schoenwetter said
market analysis has indicated this concept is very desirable, and a product the
market and the City of Edina is looking for.
Commissioner Ingwalson asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he has set a price
range for the proposed new,homes. Mr. Schoenwetter said prices will be in the
300 thousand dollar + range.
Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he owns the three
lots. Mr. Schoenwetter said the lots are owned by two different parties, and JMS
has entered into a purchase agreement with them.
Mary Kay Cadalbert, 5333 Interlachen Boulevard, told the Commission
privacy is very important to. her, and with five houses constructed in such a small
area her privacy will be compromised. Mr. Schoenwetter interjected the homes
will have east/west exposures with minimal windows on the north /south
exposure.
Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Larsen to explain the zero lot line
concept. Mr. Larsen explained "traditional" single dwelling unit lots must
maintain setbacks from the sideyards: The zero lot line concept maintains a
setback from only one sideyard. Commissioner Byron asked if setbacks must be
maintained from the front and rear. Mr. Larsen said that is correct.
RA
Mr. R. Miller, 5340 Hollywood Road, urged the Commission to deny the
proposal before them. He stated Edina is foremost a residential community, and
in his opinion this is over development.
Mr. Walencamp, 5332 Hollywood Road, stated he does not support the
proposal as presented, it establishes a precedent that many corner lots could
also try to achieve.
Mr. Peterson, 5005 Bedford Avenue, told the Commission he would like
the subject site to be developed with single family homes, not the proposed zero
lot line concept presented this evening.
Ms. Bisson, 5340 Hollywood Road, stated she also cannot support the
proposal, and in her opinion this site is being developed for financial gain. She
commented what would stop others from "maxing out" their properties if this is
approved.
Commissioner Swenson interjected she tends to agree with comments
from the neighbors. She explained she visited the site and in her opinion the
proposed subdivision is too dense.
Commissioner Swenson moved to deny the presented subdivision.
Commissioner Lonsbury seconded the motion.
Commissioner Byron asked for clarification from Mr. Schoenwetter on
structure size, amenities, etc. Mr. Schoenwetter explained each unit will have a
two car garage, and the homes are planned to have three bedrooms or two plus
den. All homes will face Oxford Avenue and each prospective property owner
will be able to choose from three housing styles as indicated earlier. Continuing,
Mr. Schoenwetter explained each new owner will also be able to decide on
interior design options.
Commissioner Byron commented he has been considering what is going
on in the market as it relates to the health of Edina's housing stock.
Commissioner Byron pointed out much of the City's housing stock is on 50 foot
lots. Commissioner Byron said he realizes setbacks are sacred, but as a
member of the Zoning Board he routinely hears request from residents desiring a
variance from our setback requirements. Commissioner Byron added a majority
of those requests come from residents on substandard lots (lots less than 75
feet). Commissioner Byron said in looking at this objectively the proposal
continues to provide single family homes. He acknowledged they may not be
considered the single family lots of 'old," but that does not necessarily mean the
product presented tonight is not desirable. Commissioner Byron said this may
not be the right location for this concept, but the idea is intriguing. Concluding,
Commissioner Byron said the width of the lots could result in four homes, adding
it may be possible that a zero lot line concept may result in the construction of
3
homes that better match the character of the neighborhood and similar house
size.
Commissioner McClelland interjected she grew up in a community of 35
foot lots and commended JMS for bringing this design concept to the City.
Commissioner McClelland said while she supports the concept she does not
believe this is the right location for five homes.
Chair Runyan said he also believes the proposal presented in very nice,
adding he has a hard time visualizing five homes in this area.
Commissioner Workinger stated in his opinion the design is very well
done, but he is not in favor of five homes.
Commissioner Bergman asked Mr. Schoenwetter if four homes would
work for him. Mr. Schoenwetter said he believes four homes are workable, but
no less than four.
Commissioner Lonsbury said occasionally the Commission has before
them a proposal that has merit, but may need some revisions. He asked Mr.
Schoenwetter if he would be willing to table this proposal allowing time for
redesign. Continuing, Commissioner Lonsbury said from the discussion thusfar
it appears the Commission finds the concept well done, but five units appears to
be too dense in this area.
Mr. Schoenwetter stated he withdraws his request.
Commissioner Swenson withdrew her motion to deny and moved to
accept the withdrawal request from Mr. Schoenwetter. Commissioner Losnbury
seconded the motion.. All voted aye; motion carried.
P -00 -5 Chris her). Cummins
Concor Properties, LLC
10 Southd Center
Movie Theat Restaurant Ex sion
Mr. Larsen presented his staff /rculation mmended Final Development Plan
approval conditioned on:
1. City Engineer appro a ring route design.
2. An easement to allo hicles ri to cross center
property. .
3. Watershed Dist Permits.
4
I
EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 1, 2000
STAFF REPORT
Z -00-4 JMS - INTERLACHEN OF EDINA
JEFF AND NANCY SCHOENWETTER
LOTS 1, 2, 3, BLOCK 5 BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS
5012 OXFORD AVENUE
5343 INTERLACHEN BOULEVARD
The subject property comprises 3 single dwelling lots all of which are
zoned R -1, Single Dwelling he 3i lots is10 61 acres, or 26,572 square roperties. Total area of e feet The
Comprehensive Plan designates the properties as Single Family.
The City has received a request to redevelop the property with a five unit,
zero lot line development. The proposal requires a rezoning of the property to a
multi - family district, in thiSl{ aan'dh wo
uld allow townhouseDs and apartment/
considered medium density
condominium buildings, as well as zero lot line homes. The zoning ordinance
requires a lot area of 4,400 square feet per unit in the PRD -3 district. The
proposed plan would comply with the density requirement in the PRD -3 district.
Recommendation
The proposed plan is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and is
not consistent with existing development in the neighborhood. In concept the
proposal is similar to the zero lot line development along the northern portion of
Malibu Drive. The difference is that d nlial of the proposed rezoning based zoned
for multi - family use. Staff recommends
on inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. I would, however, support a
single family redevelopment of these properties. There is enough width to the
site to have a 53 foot wide lot at the corner of Oxford and Interlachen and three
50 foot lots to the north. Such a layout would be consistent with the
neighborhood and would comply with neighborhood median lot width of 50 feet.
ERQ22LCaLMM-XX=6LE
rir r.
& �
GOPHER STATE ONE Cd+! L
PRELIMINARY PLAN
L--- ----- L-- - - - - --
INTERLACHEN BLVD
NnTES,
L
Ak
NORTH
wawa
Roger A. Andersonr Associates. Inc. BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION GRADING, DRAINAGE, &
EDINA, MINNESOTA EROSION CONTROL PLAN OF 2
JMS DEVELOPMENT
a
r
z
LLJ
>
%
0
..
F
. . . .
%
. .
......
.... ..
it
NnTES,
L
Ak
NORTH
wawa
Roger A. Andersonr Associates. Inc. BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION GRADING, DRAINAGE, &
EDINA, MINNESOTA EROSION CONTROL PLAN OF 2
JMS DEVELOPMENT
a
EXHIBIT A
January 3, 2001
From: Peter Leenders
5317 Hollywood Road
Edina, MN 55435
To: Mr. Gordon Johnson, Chair
Planning Commission
City of Edina
4801 W. 50' Street
Edina, Mn 55424
Re: Interlachen /Oxford Subdivision # S -00 -5 project,
Comments centering around the Brookside Heights Plat Section
In response to the various comments made during the two prior hearings before the City
Planning Commission, I undertook an analysis of the available property data for the
Brookside Heights Plat section. In defense of the non - conforming definition by the
proponents of `Neighborhood' as meaning only selected parts of Brookside Heights it is
being argued that the proposed 4 lot re- platting would be within the character of the
Oxford Ave. section.
In today's Planning Staff Report you are finally receiving corrected dimensional data for
the Neighborhood as defined by the Edina City Codes. Nevertheless, approval of the
proposed 4 -lot development is still being recommended by the City Planner.
In opposition I would like to direct your attention to the location of the project site, its
configuration and relation to the adjacent properties.
To this end I am submitting to you a total of 10 different Area Maps as described in the
following list.
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 1
OFFICIAL CITY OF EDINA MAP
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 2
EDINA PLANNING DEPT. LOCATION MAP, SUBDIVISION #S -00 -5
Peter Leenders 1103/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 3
JMS APPLICATION, 500 FT NEIGHBORHOOD
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 4
MAP SECTION 3C,
ORIGINAL PLATTING OFBROOKSIDE HEIGHTS SECTION
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 5
R -1 ZONE OF MAP SECTION 3C
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 6
= MAP REF. #5, PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OVERLAYED
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 7
SOUTH INTERLAKEN BLOCK SECTION BETWEEN OXFORD AVE. AND SKYLINE DRIVE Peter
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 8
AERIAL VIEW OF NEIGHBORHOOD
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 9
= MAP REF. # 89 PLAT GRID 0VERLAYED
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 10
= MAP REF. # 9, 2X SCALE
The importance of Interlachen Blvd to the neighborhood and the entire NW Section of
Edina is apparent from a study of map Ref. #1. It connects the neighborhoods to 5&
Street, Vernon Ave. and HY 100 to the East, and to Blake Road to the West. It has so far
maintained its character as a pleasant typical neighborhood road, comparable to other
similar `thoroughfares' such as Woodale Ave. It deserves to be viewed as an artery rather
than a dividing feature in the neighborhood.
Interlachen Blvd. is an integral element of the Brooside Heights Section. A study of the
only partly updated original Plat Map for Brookside Heights, Ref. #4, shows the initial
orientation of the northern -most parcels toward Interlachen Blvd.
I am referring here to the section between the South Side of Interlachen Blvd and the
demarcation line of the original E -W Alley as the Interlachen Strip of Brookside
Heights. Please note that the key parcel to be subdivided per the proposal represents the
western limit of the strip (Ref. #5).
ANALYSIS OF BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS PLAT.
The Brookside Height Plat appears to have originated as far back as the 1930s or 40s. It
suggests an initial number of 19 parcels in the Interlachen Strip, all aligned in a N -S
direction facing Interlachen Blvd. The uniform initial N -S dimension of these parcels was
130 ft. Where the bordering Alley sections have been abandoned, the affected lots are
now 137 ft. North to South (except for Rowland's Addition). 15 of the initial parcels had
an E -W dimension of 54 ft to 55 ft. Both, the two parcels at the eastern limit of the
Interlachen Strip and at its western limit were 67 ft to 68 ft E -W (i.e. width along
Interlachen Blvd).
Through combining some adjoining parcels, the number of distinct lots within the
Interlachen Strip has been reduced to a total of 15. All parcel combinations within the
Interlachen Strip, as is the case throughout the Brookside resulted in larger lots. This is
indicated in the following summary.
NUMBER OF ADDRESSES IN R-1 DISTRICT OF BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS AND
LARGER LOTS CREATED BY COMBINATIONS OF ORIGINAL PLAT
PARCELS.
Interlachen Strip
15 Addresses
4 Combinations / 27% of total
Oxford Ave.
26
15 / 58% of total
Bedford Ave.
40
4 6r. / 10% of total
William Ave.
38
4 " / 11% of total
Hankerson Ave.
25 66
7 " / 28% of total
Brookside Heights Total 144 Addresses 34 Combinations / 24% of Total
ANALYSES OF INTERLACHEN STRIP AND OXFORD AVE PEOPERTY
DIMENSIONS.
5343 Interlachen Blvd. is the key lot in the proposed subdivision. It is located at the NW
Corner of Oxford Ave. and at the West End of the Interlachen Strip. The placement of
the dwelling makes it one lot. The dimensions of this undivided lot are close to the
governing code standards.
The current dimensions of all the lots in the R -1 Section of the Interlachen Strip and
Oxford Ave. are presented in the following studies, titled Plan A, B, C, D.
Intertachen/Oxford data analysis on Brookside Heights Plat
Peter Leenders, Jan 3, 2001
PLAN A, Interlachen South Side to E -W Alley
15 lots- 1193 1,858 144,390
Mean 79.5 123.9 9,619
Median 75 130 81494
5 of 15 ( =35%) of lots in Plan A are 54 to 55 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest width dimension in this analysis.
Address
E/W ft
N/S ft
sq. feet
(width)
(depth)
area _
5211
Interlachen
68
125
8,500
5215
Interlachen
68,
131
8,908
5221
Interlachen
5.5
137
7,535
5225
Interlachen
54
137
7,398
5233
Interlachen
83
137
11,371
5237
Interlachen
79
137
10,823
5000
William
88
130
11,440
5305
Interlachen
75
130
9,750
5313
Interlachen,
108
65
7,020
5005
Bedford
108
65
7,020
5321
Interlachen
109
137
14,933
5329
Interlachen
54
130
7,020
5333
Interlachen
54
130
7,020
5001
Oxford
54
130
7,020
5343
Interlachen
136
137
18,632
15 lots- 1193 1,858 144,390
Mean 79.5 123.9 9,619
Median 75 130 81494
5 of 15 ( =35%) of lots in Plan A are 54 to 55 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest width dimension in this analysis.
Interlachen/Oxford data analysis on Brookside Heights Plat
Peter Leenders, Jan 3, 2001
15 lots 2,043 1,061 144,561
Mean 136 71 9,637
Median 136 65 8,840
6 of 15 ( =40%) of lots in Plan B are 50 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
1/2/01
PLAN B, West Side of Oxford Ave. from Interlachen
Blvd.
South to End of R -1
Zone
_
Address
E/W ft
NIS ft
sq feet
(depth)
(width)
area
5343
Interlachen
136
137
18,632
5012
Oxford
135
62
8,370
5016
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5020
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5024
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5028
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5032
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5036
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5040
Oxford
136
65
8,840
5044
Oxford
136
65
8,840
5100
Oxford
136
105
14,280
5108
Oxford
137
77
10,549
5112
Oxford
137
80
10,960
5120
Oxford
137
70
9,590
5128
Oxford
137
100
13,700
15 lots 2,043 1,061 144,561
Mean 136 71 9,637
Median 136 65 8,840
6 of 15 ( =40%) of lots in Plan B are 50 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
1/2/01
1L1\r114V11V1U VlllV1LL UaL" 01I613010 VIA 1 =I
Peter Leenders, Jan 3, 2001
PLAN C, East Side of Oxford Ave. from Interlachen Blvd.
South to End of R -1 Zone
3 lots 1607 912 108,250
Mean 124 70 8,327
Median 129 75 9,100
5 of 13 ( =38 %) of lots in Plan C are 50 to 55 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
1/2/01
Address
E/W ft
N /S.ft
sq feet
(depth)
(width)
area
5001
Oxford
54
130
7,020
5013
Oxford
129
55
7,095
5017
Oxford
129
50
6,450
5021
Oxford
129
75
9,675
5029
Oxford
129
75
9,675
5033
Oxford
129
50
6,450
5037
Oxford
129
50
6,450
5045
Oxford
129
75
9,675
5101
Oxford
130
77
10,010
5109
Oxford
130
75
9,750
5113
Oxford
130
80
10,400
5121
Oxford
130
70
9,100
5125
Oxford
130
50
6,500
3 lots 1607 912 108,250
Mean 124 70 8,327
Median 129 75 9,100
5 of 13 ( =38 %) of lots in Plan C are 50 to 55 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
1/2/01
Interlachen/Oaford data analysis on Brookside Heights Plat
Peter Leenders, Jan 3, 2001
PLAN D, Both Sides of Oxford Ave. from Interlachen Blvd.
South to End of R -1 Zone, Summary
Location of lots E/W ft N/S ft sq reeL
(depth) (width) area
West Side of Oxford (15) 2,043 1,061 144,561
East Side of Oxford (13) 1,607 912 108,250
28 lots - Combined Totals
3,650
1,973
252,811
Mean
Median
130
135.5
70
67.5
9,029
8,840
11 of 28 lots ( =39 %) located in the R -1 district of Oxford Ave
are 50 to 55 ft wide, I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
�N-
(insert pages of studies)
CONCLUSIONS
Studying the map references, the relationship of the proposed subdivision to the
Interlachen Strip and to Oxford Ave. leads to the conclusion that the subdivision into 4
lots is not appropriate for maintaining and enhancing the character of the Brookside
Heights Neighborhood.
The only sensible options for development of the property at 5343 Interlachen appear to
be
A. Single dwelling on the current undivided lot
B. A total of two dwellings, one each on 2 lots created by subdivision per the
original plat.
Although B would technically require code variances, I think it can be supported as
fitting the Neighborhood by its dimensions and in comparison to other corner
configurations within the Interlachen Strip.
A prime consideration has to be the creation of a harmonious arrangement of the 4
corners on Interlachen Blvd., Oxford Ave. and Hollywood Rd. It is worth noting that all
other road intersections in Brookside Heights with Interlachen Blvd. involve only 2
corners each, i.e. none of the other roads go across Interlachen.
The present lot at 5012 Oxford fits the neighborhood, although the dwelling does not.
Redevelopment here does not require any combination/subdivision of existing parcels.
In conclusion, I remain totally opposed to the combining/subdivision of the two
involved properties leading to 4 severely undersized lots totally out of the existing
code stipulations and having a severely negative effect on everything dear to us in
the existing neighborhood.
EXHIBIT B
Comments I made at the Edina Planning Commission Meeting
on 3 January 2001 opposing the 4 -lot subdivision of the
properties located at 5343 Interlachen Boulevard and 5210
Oxford Avenues in Edina.
My name is Carolyne Bisson, and I have spoken before this
group twice before. My comments at those meetings should
have been sent to you as amendments to the minutes from
those meetings. Did everyone receive those 3 pages? (They
nod they did.) I thank Jackie for doing that.
Whereas the previous speakers have spoken for themselves,
I speak for the almost 50 people from Interlachen Boulevard
neighborhood who have signed this petition against the
proposed development. I have names from people on upper
Oxford and lower Oxford Ave., from Hollywood Rd., of course,
and from Bedford, Hankerson, from Vandervork Ave., from
one end of Interlachen to the other. There are names from
Blossom Court, Orchard Road, and Mirror Lakes Drive. Clearly,
the neighborhood opposes this development.
There have been a lot of numbers heard here tonight, many
of then corrections to what the developer has offered.
And it seems things continue to get curiouser and curiouser.
The plat on the overheard is from a survey done by Cartwright
and Olson in Sept. of 1947 of Lots 1 and 2, Block 5, Brookside
Heights. It is a copy from files at city hall. This survey
shows the lots to be 60.75 and 63.95 in width, not 67.75
and 67.95•as the city and the developer have shown. Lots
facing Oxford will not meet the depth requirement of 130,
if this survey is correct. Just another of many inconsistencies.
Anyway, I am a homemaker. I was trained as an English
teacher but haven't taught in years. I am neither a scientist,
nor a city planner. Tonight I feel like a history teacher.
Here is something I ran across while reading some of the
old Planning Commission minutes today. Several of you,
I know, such as Mr. Johnson and Mrs. McClelland, have been
on this commission for a long time. This quote is from
the minutes of the April, 1981, meeting, and it pertains
to the Evanswood Lane subdivision. It says that Mr. Johnson
said then that the:
"goal of the Planning Commission is to assist the developer
in developing his property in a manner that is consistent
with the existing neighborhood. The result of those endeavors
must then meet with the standards set up in the city ordinances.
Mr. Johnson added that a development takes the efforts
of a three way team; the developer, the neighborhood, and
the city working together for the best solution for all."
End of quote.
I would also like to call your attention to an ordinance,
passed in April of 1971. It is Ordinance #1001 -A1, Section
4/ -" Qt&4—
19, and it reads: "It shall be a misdemeanor for anyone
to aid, abet; advise, encourage or assist another to violate
any ordinance of the Village." Mr. Hyde moved approval.
Mr. Courtney seconded, and the ordinance passed, 4 ayes
and no nays.
Now for the history lesson. The developer has shown us
a lot of pretty pictures tonight but the fact of the matter
is that ,this developer's trademark is-to overbuild whenever
possible, and that is what he wants to do here.* He wants
to have things both ways. He wants smaller lots., as in
the Brookside Heights area, and bigger houses, as on the
larger lots.
When ,I moved into this area in 1970, there was only ONE
house on Interlachen Boulevard between William and Bedford,
and ONE house between Bedford and Oxford on the south side
of the street. The five additional houses that are now
there needed variances to build as close to Interlachen
as they did (30'). There were petitions then, and much
of the objection then involved the long - maintained restriction
against filling in along the south side of Interlachen.
A house much further west of Oxford at 5649 Interlachen
Cir., which was built in 1952, also needed a variance to
be allowed to build with its side to Interlachen Blvd.
as the planners then recognized that as the shun or snub
it was to that elegant lane. Interlachen Boulevard was
recognized as one of Edina's finest assets. Further east,
yet still west of the property where JMS Homes wants to
build, homeowners that for years were not allowed to subdivide,
nor to fill their front yards i -n the area directly south
of Interlachen where water would pool in the spring and
after a heavy rainstorm, were then in the 1980's granted
permission to sell off their several acres of wooded, topographically
varied land and Interlachen Bluff was created. Three
hundred year old trees were felled and the development
required so much fill that the basement of one of those
houses collapsed in the first year after it was completed.
The home was taken down and never rebuilt.
Interlachen Boulevard is the dividing line between the
Nine Mile Creek Watershed District on the South and the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on the north. The five
homes that were built between William and Oxford in 1971
have caused run -off problems ever since. The 1987 event
I mentioned before is one of the worst examples.
In addition, if you allow 4 = 3 bedroom homes to be crowded
onto those two lots, that is a potential for 12 -24 people
occupying that corner, an increase of 1200 -2400 gallons
of wastewater per day. When the street improvements were
done in the Brookside Heights area last summer, one of
the city's engineers, Mr. Buffie, told me, the sewer line
at 52nd and William had to be replaced because it was collapsed
or nearly collapsed. Mr. Anderson, JMS' engineer, talks
about the elaborate scheme they have devised to deal with
the surface run -off water that collects on that corner.
He says Fran Hoffman hasn't had a chance to look at it.
I spoke to Fran Hoffman today and that is true, he hasn't
reviewed this scheme. Mr. Hoffman says that, typically,
he does not review these things until they are passed.
He says that with modern engineering, they can deal with
the problems of almost any site. Do you want to load up
this corner with homes so badly that you'll dig up a county
road and put in elaborate holding tanks? Holding tanks
that must discharge their contents somewhere. Mr. Hoffman
says that the problem with some of those systems is that
they can cause an overload in the sanitary sewer system
if surface water from sump pumps or other such holding areas
is released into the sanitary sewer, as'happened ' to many
Edina homes in 1997. (We now have an ordinance against
sump pumps connected to the sanitary sewer.)
The commission needs to take a good look at what has been
done along the south side of Interlachen since 1971 right
up to today. Drive by there and you will see that the homeowner
at 5340 Interlachen, directly across the.street from the
proposed subdivision, has bput up a 6' high berm along the
front of his property. He did this soon after the subdivision
sign went up. Certainly a berm will divert surface water
run -off as well.
You can allow them to build these homes. Go ahead and allow
it. But you know and I know that overbuilding causes run-
off problems. Filling in wetlands and collecting areas
does also. Interlachen Boulevard is one of Edina's finest
assets. Planning mistakes have been made there in the past.
variances were granted when they should not have been.
5343 Interlachen has become key to the drainage in the area.
You have an opportunity here to set some things right and
get back on track again. I hope you will.
Whatever you decide, a petition will be filed with the Environmental
Quality Board next week asking for an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet to be prepared regarding this proposal.
I respect what this commission does. You are volunteers
and these are complex issues which require study. But you
must enjoy it or you wouldn't.serve. I rather enjoy studying
planning issues too. But this has been difficult to do
during this holiday season - researching and gathering information,
studying the situation. I took the time and did it. But
when an ordinary citizen has to put this much time into
something that is really the Planning Commission and the
Planning Department Staff's job, something is really wrong.
Thank you. Respectfully submitted,
Stat f Minnesota
Sworn to before me this 9th day
DEBRA A. MANl3EN
NOTARY PUBUC•MNW0OTA
My camsWa ai, ZOOS
of January, 2001 by 0Gt !- J(, M P eO u & CG`
*Number originally spoken: six.
*He has done it on Lincoln Drive, on the parcel shaved
off of Parkwood Road, and he has done it on.Richwood Drive
where he was allowed to fill in area absolutely VITAL to
the watershed'there.
Addendum: I would like to note here that I am not opposed
to 50' lots. I lived in a house on Vandervork Avenue.for
ten years that was on a 50' lot and it was .a great neighborhood
and a great house. Brookside Heights and the Cleveland
Addition are vital'to the balance and rhythm of the.built
environment in our little northeast corner of Edina. But.,
as Mrs. Swensen said at the November meeting, we are a
"little island." We are uniquely contained by Highway
100 and Vernon Avenue., Meadowbrook and Interlachen Golf
Courses. Everything relates to Interlachen Boulevard.
The effect on the aesthetics and hydrokinetics of Interlachen
Boulevard should be a PRIMARY consideraton when any development
along it is proposed.
I also would like to note that I know that many fine residential
developments would not be enjoyed today if areas weren't
filled, ground wasn't evened out or recontoured. But water
is a powerful force and it must be reckoned with. To expect
the city engineers to continually-mop up after bad planning
which works against nature rather than with her lacks vision,
is not practical, and plays games with everyone's property
values.
CORRESPONDENCE
. Jackie Hoogenakker
om: christopher .j.glenn @mail.sprint.com
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:30 AM
To: jhoogenakker @ci.edina.mn.us
Subject: TESTIMONY FOR JANUARY 16 HEARING on the property at 5012 Oxford and 5343
Interlachen
In the matter of the subdivision of the aforementioned property, I would
like to express my opposition to subdivision in any form. The 50 foot
wide lot sizes that were approved in the 1940's were based on homes from
a different era. Unless the developer is proposing to develop tiny Cape
Cods, like the ones that predominate our neighborhood, these lots are
not of sufficient size for subdivision.
That said, if the City ultimately decides to approve any form of
subdivision, I would like to share my opinion that the approval should
include a requirement that the subdivided properties be differentiated
aesthetically. This is a single family neighborhood and to allow any
number of identical cookie -cutter properties to mark the entrance of our
neighborhood would be a mistake. The developer may still reap economies
of scale by building homes that are structurally similar and even
identical on the inside, but outside, the homes should appear different,
including different exterior colors, different siding, and different
archetectural accents.
Christopher Glenn
5028 Bedford Avenue
December 1, 2000
Comments delivered by me, Carolyne Bisson, to the-Edina
Planning Commission on November 29, 2000, in opposition
to the second proposed subdivision of the lots on the S.-W.
corner of Interlachen Boulevard and Oxford Avenue.
My name is Carolyne Bisson and I.live at 5340 Hollywood
Road. The last time I was here I spoke to the negative
impact loading up these lots with houses would have upon
the integrity and character of the neighborhood, and to
the fact that Interlachen Boulevard began and continues
as, esentially, a country lane. Those comments are now
in the permanent record so I will not reiterate them here.
Tonight I would like to speak to several other concerns:
*1. Our house was built in 1953, one of the first ones
in the area. In 1987, during a torrential downpour dubbed
"The Storm of the Century;" water flowed down Interlachen
Boulevard from all directions, down Hollywood Road, and,
instead of flowing down the spillway on the south perimeter
of. our property, flowed across our driveway and cut a 19'
crevice in our yard, tearing out the blacktop, the wall
along the back of our driveway, and trees.and shrubs for
100 feet. The city, recognizing its liability, repaired
the damage fully. They brought in over 30 truckloads of
fill, they rebuilt and re- blacktopped the driveway, they
rebuilt the wood wall along the driveway and installed three
new terraced retaining walls, as well and a new concrete
spillway. In 1990, the sanitary sewer backed up in our
basement due to the city!s failure to regularly maintain
the lines. The lower -3-e el of our home was effected and
repairs ran over $14,000. Cost of that repair was covered
by the City of Edina, our insurance company, and by us.
There have been instances throughout Edina since then involving
countless homes destroyed or nearly destroyed by storm and
sanitary systems which were inadequate or poorly. maintained,
.and _could not handle certain extrodinary or unusual. circumstances.
Communities develop in this way. What are adequate or sufficient
public utilities for a community in the 50's is at the peak
of its usage in the 80's and showing signs of problems in
the 90's. Clearly this needs to be addressed, and the City
of Edina IS addressing this issue in some of the more newly
developed areas, such as the area by Malibu Drive, and in
the Centennial Lakes area. In our area, they recently made
some major repairs along Interlachen and Skyline Drive, r.
the exact nature and purpose of which I do not know. I
ask, you, therefore.: What, if anything, is the city of
Edina prepared to do to accomadate the increased useage
of the storm and sanitary sewers that these homes will require?
And if the answer to that is nothing, I would like assurance,
in writing, that the city engineers have considered this
question and know the present systems to be adequate.
2. On Circle East, not far from us, a certain party purchased
a home and requested an 11' variance t-o the set -backs to
build the home they had planned. This request was denied,
as it probably should have. Codes are codes. Many of our
neighbors, who are all prepared to testify before you, have
made requests to the Planning Commission for variances of,
often, 1, - to install a bay window or a cabinet, and are
denied Time and again, the Planning Commission has responded
in this Time
and I suppose they should. The code states
that variances meet a number.of conditions, including unusual
hardsh.ip due to the shape or topography of the land, as
well as others. These requirements are good and thoughtful
rules to guide development. VARIANCES should be the.exception
and not commonplace - hence the use of the root word "vary,"
meaning to deviate.
I maintain that it is your duty and .obligation to apply
the same yardstick (meterstick ?) to the developer who wants
to line his pockets with dollars as you do to the homeowner
who wishes to enhance his dwelling. I also maintain that
to assign some greater or more nobler purpose to the developer's
actions over the homeowners is not your pe-grogative. Furthermore,
I also maintain, with all due respect, that any Planning
Commission that calls $350,000 townhomes transitional,
low- income housing" borders on appearing ludicrous.
3. Craig Larson says that economics drives these things."
Perhaps. Grant me a variance and*Y'll but the property
and turn it into pastureland for a pony for my grandson.
That at.least would be more in keeping with the area than
what the Schoenwetter's are proposing. And the current
owners will probably make just as much money as they -will
with subdividing.
If the Schoenwetter's .truly want to help produce low income
housing in Edina, they should do it within the current guidelines
and put three modest homes on-those lots and reap their,
albeit more modest, reward.
This is not monoply, people., These are our homesteads.
I urge the Planning Commission.to do your job and act in
the direction of neighborhood preservation and not to simply
maximize development.
Finally, I would ask Mr.'
r Schoehwetter how close he l' s to his neighbors. Thank you.
s
r
Respectfully submitted, JANE M. TIMM
NCTARY PUBLIC- MINNESOTA
M- Ctan „ssi pitesJar.3i, 2U05
( / /�,
s
U
December 1, 2000
My name--i-s Carolyne Bisson. I have lived in MiYnesota all
my; life and in Edina for'the past 30. years. These are my
comments; delivered to the Edina Planning Commission on
November- 1, .2000, in opposition to the proposed subdivision
of the the lots on the S.W. corner -of Interlachen Boulevard
and Oxford avenue. Please include them in your official
minutes of that meeting.
Guidelines. Perimeters. Rules. Codes. Respect for the
land.
I -would like to remind th'e Commissioners that-we are not
only owners of the land; but caretakers as well. We must
stop looking at property with dollar signs: in our eyes and'
look with an eye to the future. If this request is approved,
what is to stop anyone from .subdividing and moving--towards
maximizing the useage arid? thus the dollar value of their
property?
Interlachen Boulevard began, and continues as, a country
lane. Wildlife abounds along it and within the many large
lots. Deer move from Me.adowbrook'Golf Course along the
corridor under the powerlines all the-way to Braemar and
beyond. Certainly we can co -exist with this mild intrusion
on our properties. Increasing the structural density of
the area would work to eliminate that, and other aspects
of the neighborhood as it currently eists.
Warren Hyde had the vision and the will to bring Edina along
to the beautiful- planned community it is today. Lets maintain
the.fine tradition he began, and that ' Craig 'Larson and past
planning commissions have maintained, and hold the line
against down zoning and'zero lot lining. Thank you.
Respectfully submintted,
Caroly Bisson
JANE M. TIMM
NOTARY pUSUC.MINNESOTA
Ny .0mmissfon Expkee Jan. 31, 2005
- _......•AAAA^AfV6W X
/d'o OCR
' � 9
r
January 3, 2001
Mr. Gordon Johnson, Chair
City Planning Commission
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
RE: Preliminary Plat, JMS, Inc., Brookside Heights
Dear Chair Johnson and Members of the Commission
We, as neighbors of the property at Oxford and Interlachen Boulevard request the Commission
not approve the Plat as proposed. We recognize that while redevelopment of at least the
northerly parcel may be timely, we ask you reject the this development that is the intent of the
presently proposed plat for these reasons.
1. The rotation of the orientation of the northerly lots from their present platting, and the
established platting and development of the other parcels fronting on Interlachen Blvd in
the neighborhood, will create a severe conflict and disruption of the established pattern of
development in the neighborhood.
2. This development, if permitted, because of its aggressiveness and resulting
noncompliance with the minimum standards of the code, will require 25 separate
variances. These standards that must be varied to approve the subdivision ensure
compatible massing and rhythm with the present development of the neighborhood.
These many and comprehensive variances of the of the City's adopted protections, and the
proposed reversed orientation to Interlachen Blvd, will alter the essential character of the
neighborhood and the experience of Interlachen Blvd, the entry way to our neighborhood
and homes.
3. The process must be orderly and the Commission and Council must follow the adopted
rules when considering this application. While redevelopment of lots 1 and 2 could be
welcome, this is not an exceptional property, and virtually none of the conditions required
for support in granting the needed variances by 810.05 Subd. 1 A -F and 850.04 Subd. 1 F
are present at this site or claimed by the developer.
4. The use of a Neighborhood "subarea" to establish minimum standards is not permitted.
The concept of using subareas has been anticipated in the Code. The only division into
subareas is provided for in 810.02 Subd. 1 Definition of Neighborhood, C, is in the case
I
of T. H. 100 or T. H. 62. If any subarea is used in this case, it should consist of the
homes along Interlachen Blvd.
A. Proposed Orientation to Interlachen Blvd
In addition to the quantitative measures of compatibility carried in the City setback and other
requirements, the entire plan is flawed in its orientation to Interlachen. Figure One is a 1 inch
equals 100 ft scaled site plan placed on and aerial photo of the neighborhood along Interlachen
Blvd. The disrespect of this plan for the neighbors who live on and use Interlachen is appalling.
This site plan, with its intrusion into the established setback and character along Interlachen
Blvd, will stand out like a sore thumb in our neighborhood.
B. Proposed Variances
In contrast with expanding or rebuilding a home on an existing platted lot, which is regulated by
Section 850 Subd 20 C. Non - Conforming Lots, to approve the proposed subdivision the City is
required to provide the following variances from the applicable regulations:
Lot 1
Lot 2
to
1. To reduce the minimum lot a= required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 9750 sf
to
6493 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 35 %, from 75 ft to
48.7 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce he required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum building coverage by, 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A2)
5. To increase the maximum building coverage by 20 %, from 30 % to 37% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2) `
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
7. To reduce the required side street setback along Interlachen. by 82% or 84 %, from
53.6 ft (850.11 Subd 7 A. 1), or, 48 ft (850.11 Subd 7 A. 2), to 11 ft.
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %, from 9750 sf
6659 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
Lot 3
Lot 4
2: To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 75, ft to
50 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to ,133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A 2)
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 17 %, from 30% to 36% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %, from 9750 sf
to
6659 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 75 ft to
50 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum, lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf.to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A2)
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 17 %, from 30% to 36% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %,from 9750 sf to
6638 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 75 ft to
�, 50 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. Toxeduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 132 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A 2)
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 1.7 %, from 30% to 36% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by, 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
Each of these measures is a standard set by the City to test and reinforce the compatibility of the
design of new development with the character of the neighborhood it will be placed in. In.an
earlier report the City staff established lot width as the most important test. We.think each is an
important test, and and are troubled by the number of multiple and excessive flaunting of of these
very basic measures of compatibility.
3
C. The need for an orderly process.
The findings the Commission and Council must make to grant the necessary variances required
for this development to the developer are clear. To Grant the variances of the required lot area,
width and depth, the city must find:
810.05 Variances .... shall grant variances only upon finding that an unusual hardship
exists as to the land within the plat or subdivision, and specifically that:
A. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience;
B. The hardship is due to the particular physical surroundings, shape or
topographical condition of the land;
C. The condition or conditions upon which the request for a variance is based are
unique to the property being platted or subdivided and not generally applicable
to
other property;
D. The hardship is caused by this Section and not by the applicant;
E. The variance will result in an improved plat or subdivision; and
the
F. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the land within
plat or subdivision or in the neighborhood.
To grant variances to the required setback and building coverage standards the City must find:
850.04 Subd.1, F. Findings For Variances. The Board shall not grant a petition for a
variance unless it finds that the strict enforcement of this Section would cause undue
hardship because of circumstances unique to the petitioner's property and that the grant of
said variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Section. "Undue hardship"
means that
(i) the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use as allowed by this
Section;
(ii) the plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the petitioner's
property which were not created by the petitioner; and
(iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the property or
its surroundings.
Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use
for the petitioner's property exists under the terms of this Section.
4
We understand the Code also provides "A favorable vote by the Board shall be deemed to
include a favorable finding on each of the foregoing matters even if not specifically set out in the
approval resolution or the minutes of the Board meeting" for the building coverage and setback
variances, but in this case we believe the number degree and impact of the needed variances
requires the City to make a clear and specific decision on each required finding before any
variance is granted. Neither the developer or your staff has enumerated, much less make
arguments for granting these variances.
We cannot understand how the conditions necessary for your approval are present in this
application. The proposed subdivision must therefore not be approved.
D. Use of subareas.
During this process the applicant has tried to apply a definition of "Neighborhood" that is
different than the definition adopted by the City. That definition is found in 810.02, Subd. 1, the
definitions section of the Plats and Subdivision regulations. The City definition is:
Neighborhood. All lots in the Single Dwelling Unit District as established by Section 850 of this
Code which are wholly or partially within 500 feet of the perimeter of the proposed plat or
subdivision, except:
A. Lots used for publicly owned parks, playgrounds, athletic
facilities and golf courses;
B. Lots used for conditional uses as established by Section 850 of
this Code; or
C. Lots separated from the proposed plat or subdivision by the
right of way of either T.H. 100 or T.H. 62.
and,
"If the neighborhood includes only a part of a lot, then the whole of that lot shall be included in
the neighborhood. As to streets on the perimeter of the proposed plat or subdivision, the 500 feet
shall be measured from the common line of the street and. the proposed plat or subdivision."
The concept of using subareas has been anticipated in the Code. The sole reason to exclude
some parts of the Neighborhood and include others is provided in exception "C ". And, while
Interlachen is carrying more traffic, it does not rise to the level of Highways 100 or 62 in dividing
neighborhoods.
s
R
If a subarea must be recognized, it should be the Interlachen frontage. This is the most important
frontage to all of us as it is our gateway and establishes the essential character- of the
neighborhood.
This is a flawed proposal. The only benefits are economic and flow solely to the present owners
and the developer. The costs of this incompatible development to the character and beauty of our
neighborhood will be borne by those of us who live nearby, by everyone using Interlachen Blvd.,
and, by the precedent you would set by approving the required variances, every resident of Edina
who trusts the City to assure compatible development in its neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
4ae� 4�
Ir 3% 1A/174►..Y
G
Craig Larsen
-'rom: Debra Strege
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 12:04 PM
To: Craig Larsen
Subject: Oxford and Interlachen Proposed Subdivision
I wanted to thank you for your work on our neighborhood's current issue with the comer lots at Oxford and Interlachen. I
know there will be future meetings regarding this issue, but in the meantime I wanted to let you know how much I and my
neighbors appreciated your work for us. You have been very courteous and diligent in you efforts.
Debra Strege
5113 Oxford Ave.
•
Importance: High
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Mike Makowski and I reside at 5024 Bedford Avenue, Edina MN. The purpose of this letter is to document my opinion
of the proposed zoning variance for Oxford Avenue and to have this opinion be considered in my absence when the city counsel
considers the matter.
I am opposed to the variance and feel that subdividing the two properties into smaller parcels is contrary to the interests of
neighborhood and the city at large.
I specifically object based on 3 considerations:
1. 1 am opposed to any effort which, increases the housing density and there by increases traffic, noise, and the drain on city
services.
2. 1 am opposed to altering the ambiance of the neighbor hood which currently has no examples of 35 foot road frontages.
3. 1 am opposed to the aesthetics of small road frontage lots and the type of housing that would be required to fit on such lots.
In closing let me state that I believe the residents of the City of Edina should be looking for opportunities to do exactly the opposite
of what the zoning variance proposes. We should all be looking for ways to decrease population densities and enjoying the
tranquility and increased safety that lower population densities provide.
Mike Makowski
CIO Nextel Partners
(952) 238 -2503
1
6_0 % 6 5
/ L L E_
f�
//o.
/ s
i ilel 7//
h o. ' f!e {s /ci �c
LO r A /L/,- P 3
14rxOne41l Sc
S0'1&
S0
�. 0
�,4
5 0
2
60
�j
3 2-
�O
3C�
i�
q o
Cos
s�
Gs
-173
�r
-7
112
o
5-1
-20
-70
1
2 .91
% _L'
64,0
eV 163
76- .
7
e
2;
}o L
q 5 i 2 5_
-7 3 � 2
M LApi a vh
`7 1..
J
=27 ilouyc'S
(Cr S, y
I
4� .A/
f�
//o.
/ s
i ilel 7//
h o. ' f!e {s /ci �c
LO r A /L/,- P 3
14rxOne41l Sc
CeA
i� Y VIA
ILI Ll-
Zx
�7
91,
•
January 3, 2001
From: Peter Leenders
5317 Hollywood Road
Edina; MN 55435
To: Mr. Gordon Johnson, Chair
Planning Commission
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, Mn 55424
Re: Interlachen /Oxford Subdivision # S -00 -5 project,
Comments centering around the Brookside 'Heights Plat Section
In response to the various comments made during the two prior hearings before the City
Planning Commission, I undertook an analysis of the available property data for the
Brookside Heights Plat section. In defense of the non - conforming definition by the
proponents of `Neighborhood' as meaning only selected parts of Brookside Heights it is
being argued that the proposed 4 lot re- platting would be within the character of the
Oxford Ave. section.
In today's Planning Staff Report you are finally receiving corrected dimensional data for
the Neighborhood as defined by the Edina City Codes. Nevertheless, approval of the
proposed 4 -lot development is still being recommended by the City Planner.
In opposition I would like to direct your attention to the location of the project site, its
configuration and relation to the adjacent properties.
To this end I am submitting to you a total of 10 different Area Maps as described in the
following list.
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 1
OFFICIAL CITY OF EDINA MAP
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 2
EDINA PLANNING DEPT. LOCATION MAP, SUBDIVISION #S -00 -5
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 3
JMS APPLICATION, 500 FT NEIGHBORHOOD
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 4
MAP SECTION 3C,
ORIGINAL PLATTING OF BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS SECTION
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 5
R -1 ZONE OF MAP SECTION 3C
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE #76
MAP REF. #5, PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OVERLAYED
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 7
SOUTH INTERL.AKEN BLOCK. SECTION BETWEEN OXFORD AVE. AND SKYLINE DRIVE Peter
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 8
AERIAL VIEW OF NEIGHBORHOOD
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 9
= MAP REF. # 8, PLA T GRID O VERLA YED
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 10
= MAP REF. # 9,2X SCALE
The importance of Interlachen Blvd to the neighborhood and the entire NW Section of
Edina is.apparent from.a study of map Ref. #1. It connects the neighborhoods to 50`h
Street, Vernon Ave. and HY 100 to the East, and to Blake Road to the West. It has so far
maintained its.character as a pleasant typical neighborhood road, comparable to other
similar `thoroughfares' such as Woodale Ave. It deserves to be viewed as an artery rather
than a dividing feature in the;;neighborhood.
Interlachen Blvd. is,an integral element of the Brooside Heights, Section. A study of the
only partly updated original Plat Map -for Brookside Heights, Ref. #4, shows the initial
orientation of the northern-most parcels toward Interlachen Blvd.
I am referring here to the section between the South Side of Interlachen Blvd and the
demarcation line of the original E -W Alley as the Interlachen Strip of Brookside
Heights. Please note that the key. parcel to be subdivided per the proposal represents the
western limit of the strip (Ref. 45).
ANALYSIS OF BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS PLAT.
The Brookside Height Plat appears to have originated as far back as the 1930s or 40s. It
suggests an initial number of 19 parcels in the Interlachen Strip, all aligned in a N -S
direction facing Interlachen Blvd. The uniform initial N -S dimension of these parcels was
130 ft. Where the bordering Alley sections have been abandoned, the affected lots are
now 137 ft. North to South (except for Rowland's Addition). 15 of the initial parcels had
an E -W dimension of 54 ft to 55 ft. Both, the two - parcels at the eastern limit of the
Interlachen Strip and at its western limit.were 67 ft to 68'ft E -W (i.e. width along
Interlachen Blvd).
Through combining some adjoining parcels, the number of distinct lots within the
Interlachen- .Strip has been reduced to'a total of 15. All parcel combinations within the
Interlachen Strip, as is the case throughout the Brookside resulted in larger lots. This is
indicated .in the following summary..
NUMBER OF ADDRESSES IN R -1 DISTRICT OF BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS AND
LARGER LOTS CREATED BY COMBINATIONS OF ORIGINAL PLAT
PARCELS.
Interlachen Strip
15 Addresses
4 Combinations / 27% of total
Oxford Ave.
26
15 ft
/ 58% of total
Bedford Ave.
40
4 ff
/ 10% of total
William Ave.
38
4 r4
/ 11% of total
Hankerson Ave.
25
7 r6
/ 28% of total
Brookside Heights Total 144 Addresses 34 Combinations / 24% of Total
ANALYSES OF INTERLACHEN STRIP AND OXFORD AVE PEOPERTY
DIMENSIONS.
5343 Interlachen Blvd. is the key lot in the proposed subdivision. It is located at the NW
Corner of Oxford Ave. and at the West End of the Interlachen Strip. The placement of
the dwelling makes it one lot. The dimensions of this undivided lot are close to the
governing code standards.
The current dimensions of all the lots in the R -1 Section of the Interlachen Strip and
Oxford Ave. are presented in the following studies, titled Plan A, B, C, D.
Interlachen/Oxford data analysis on Brookside Heights Plat
Peter Leenders, Jan 3, 2001
PLAN A, Interlachen South Side to E -W Alley
lots 1193 1,858 144,390
Mean 79.5 123.9 9,619
Median 75 130 8,494
5 of 15 ( =35%) of lots. in Plan A are 54 to 55 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest width dimension in this analysis.
Address
E/W ft
N/S ft
sq feet
(width)
(depth)
area
5211
Interlachen
68
125
8,500
5215
Interlachen
68
131
8,908
5221
Interlachen
55
137
7,535
5225
Interlachen
54
137
7,398
5233
Interlachen
83
137
11,371
5237
Interlachen
79
137
10,823
5000
William
88
130
11,440
5305
Interlachen
75
130
9,750
5313
Interlachen
108
65
7,020
5005
Bedford
108
65
7,020
5321
Interlachen
109
137
14,933
5329
Interlachen
54
130
7,020
5333
Interlachen
54
130
7,020
5001
Oxford
54
130
7,020
5343
Interlachen
136
137
18,632
lots 1193 1,858 144,390
Mean 79.5 123.9 9,619
Median 75 130 8,494
5 of 15 ( =35%) of lots. in Plan A are 54 to 55 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest width dimension in this analysis.
- PLAN -B
Oxford Ave
from Interlachen
Ave South -to
End of R -1 Zone
Address
E/W ft
N/S ft
sq feet
(depth)
(width)
area
5343
Interlachen
136
137
18,632
5012
Oxford
135
62
8,370
5016
Oxford
116
50
6,800
5020
Oxford
136
50
6,8.00
50.24
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5028
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5032
Oxford
1.36
50
6,800
5036
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5040
Oxford
136
65
8,840
5044
Oxford
136
65
8,840
5100
Oxford
136
105
14,280
5108
Oxford
137
77
10,549
5112
Oxford
137
80
10,960
5120
Oxford
137
70
9,590
5128
Oxford
137
100
13,700
15 lots
2,043
1,061
144,561
Mean
136
71
9,637
Median
136
65
8,840
6 of 15 ( =40%) of lots in Plan B are 50 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
1/3/01
-- PLAN-C
_
"'Oxford Ave
--East Side
Address
E/W ft
N/S ft
sq feet
(depth)
(width)
area
5001
Oxford
54
130
7,020
5013
Oxford
129
55
7,095
5017
Oxford
129,
50
6,450
'5.021
Oxford
129
75
.9,675
5029
Oxford
129
75
9,675
5033
Oxford
129
50
6,450
5037
Oxford
129
50
6,450
5045
Oxford
129
75
9,6715
5101
Oxford
130
77
10,010
5109
Oxford
130
75
9,750
5113
Oxford
130
80
10,400
5121
Oxford
130
70
91100
5125
Oxford
130
50
6,500
13 lots 1607
912 108,250
Mean 124 70 8,327
Median 129 75 91100
5 of 13 ( =38%) of lots in Plan B C are 50 to 55 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
1/3/01
P LAN D
Oxford Ave
- East Side plus
West Side
Combined Totals
Location
of lots
E/W ft
N/S ft
sq feet
(depth)
(width)
area
West Side
of Oxford (15)
2,043
1,061
144,561
East Side
of Oxford (13)
1,607
912
108,250
28 lots -
Combined Totals
3,650
1,973
252,811
Mean
130
70
9,029
Median
135.5
67.5
8,840
11 of 28 lots ( =39%) located in the R -1 district of Oxford Ave
are 50 to 55 ft wide, I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysi
1/3/01
(insert pages of studies)
CONCLUSIONS
Studying the map references, the relationship of the proposed subdivision to the
Interlachen Strip and to Oxford Ave: leads to the conclusion that the subdivision into 4
lots is not appropriate for maintaining and enhancing the character of the Brookside
Heights Neighborhood.
The only sensible options for development of the.property at 5343 .Interlachen appear to
be
A. Single dwelling on the current undivided lot
B. A total of two dwellings, one each. on 2 lots created by subdivision per the
original plat.
Although B would technically require code variances, I think it can be supported as
fitting the Neighborhood by its dimensions and in comparison to other corner
configurations within the Interlachen Strip.
A prime consideration has to be the creation of a harmonious arrangement of the 4
corners on Interlachen Blvd., Oxford Ave. and Hollywood Rd. It is worth noting that all
other road intersections in Brookside Heights with Interlachen Blvd. involve only 2
corners each, i.e. none of the other roads go across Interlachen.
The present lot at 5012 Oxford fits the neighborhood, although the dwelling does not.
Redevelopment here does not require any combination/subdivision of existing parcels.
In conclusion, I remain totally opposed to the combining/subdivision of the two
involved properties leading to 4 severely undersized lots totally out of the existing
code stipulations and having a severely negative effect on everything dear to us in
the existing neighborhood.
Richard R. Miller
5340 Hollywood Road
Edina, MN 55436
January 10, 2001
Dear Councilmember Hovland:
Next Tuesday, the City Council will hold a hearing on a proposal to join two existing,
buildable lots located at 5343 Interlachen Boulevard and 5012 Oxford Avenue. The
developer proposes to subdivide this newly joined single lot into four lots.
The Planning Commission initially approved this proposal on November 29th, as staff
recommended. This proposal was reheard by the Planning Commission on January 3rd,
because the initial vote was based on erroneous information supplied by the developer,
that was unverified by staff.
Based on corrected information supplied by nearby residents, the Planning Commission
reversed its earlier approval, by a vote of 8 -1. It is my understanding that the planning
staff continues to recommend approval, in spite of the fact that it would require 25
separate variances from the city's subdivision and zoning codes. Moreover, no hardship
was claimed, as required by state law.
The developer has introduced novel definitions of "neighborhood" and redefined
"intervening use" in an effort to justify this proposal. The attached aerial photo with a
properly scaled subdivision overlay clearly shows how incompatible this would be with
the existing neighborhood. Even worse from a community perspective, construction
would extend far into the existing setback along Interlachen Boulevard, one the Edina's
most beautiful roads.
Over the past two months, I have discussed this with dozens of neighbors, 50 of whom
have attended the Planning Commission meetings. While . everyone agrees that the
property needs to be improved, neighborhood sentiment is overwhelming opposed to
this inappropriate scheme. We respectfully ask that you vote to sustain the Planning
Commission's recommendation, and reject this proposal.
Enclosed is a copy of my letter to the Planning Commission which discusses the issues
regarding the City's code. Also enclosed is a memorandum for Mr. Peter Leeders,
which analyzes the proposal as it relates to lot sizes and Brookside Heights. I ask that
you include both in the record of Tuesday's public hearing.
Sincerely, I
W (IN'd,
1V
Tf
®r,
�wd
Tf
January 3; 2001 - - -
Mr. Gordon Johnson, Chair
City Planning Commission
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
RE: Preliminary Plat, JMS, Inc., Brookside Heights
Dear -Chair Johnson and Members of the Commission
We, as neighbors of.the property at Oxford and Interlachen Boulevard request the Commission
not approve the Plat as proposed. We recognize that while redevelopment of at least the
northerly parcel may be timely, we ask you reject the this development that is the intent of the
presently proposed plat for these reasons.
1. The rotation of the orientation of the northerly lots from their present platting, and the
established platting and development of the other parcels fronting on Interlachen Blvd in
the neighborhood, will create a severe conflict and disruption of the established pattern of
development in the neighborhood.
2. This development, if permitted, because of its aggressiveness and resulting
noncompliance with the minimum standards of the code, will require 25 separate
variances. These standards that must be varied to approve the subdivision ensure
compatible massing and rhythm with the present development of the neighborhood.
These many and comprehensive variances of the of the City's adopted protections, and the
proposed reversed orientation to Interlachen Blvd, will alter the essential character of the
neighborhood and the experience of Interlachen Blvd, the entry way to our neighborhood
and homes.
3. The process must be orderly and the Commission and Council must follow the adopted
rules when considering this application. While redevelopment of lots 1 and 2 could be
welcome, this is not an exceptional property, and virtually none of the conditions required
for support in granting the needed variances by 810.05 Subd. 1 A -F and 850.04 Subd. 1 F
F
are present at this site or claimed by the`developer. -
4. The use of a Neighborhood "subarea" to establish minimum standards is not permitted.
The concept of using subareas has been anticipated in the Code. The only division into
subareas.is provided for in 810.02 Subd. 1 Definition of Neighborhood, C, is in the case
of T. -H. 100 -or T. H. 62. If any subarea is used in this case, it should.consist of the-
homes along Interlachen Blvd.
A. Proposed Orientation to Interlachen Blvd
In addition to the quantitative measures of compatibility carried in the City setback and other
requirements, the entire plan is flawed in its orientation to Interlachen. Figure One is a 1 inch
equals 100 ft. scaled site plan placed on and aerial photo of the neighborhood along- Interlachen
Blvd. The disrespect of this plan for the neighbors who live on and use Interlachen is appalling.
This site plan, with itsintrusion into the established setback and character along Interlachen
Blvd, will stand out like a sore thumb in our neighborhood.
B. Proposed Variances
In contrast with expanding or rebuilding a home on an existing platted lot, which is regulated by
Section 850 Subd 20 C. Non- Conforming Lots, to approve the proposed subdivision the City is
required to provide the following variances from the applicable regulations:
Lot 1
Lot 2
to
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 9750 sf
to
6493 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in.this neighborhood by 35 %, from 75 ft to
48.7 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A2)
5. To increase the maximum building coverage by 20 %, from 30% to 37% of the area of
the lot.(850.1 I Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
7. To reduce the required side street setback along Interlachen by 82% or 84 %, from
53.6 ft (850.11 Subd 7 A. 1), or, 48 ft (850.11 Subd 7 A. 2), to 8'1/2 ft.
1. To reduce:the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %, from 9750 sf
6659 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2
Lot 3
Lot 4
2. To reduce the 'ininimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 33 %; from 75 ft to-
50 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd .6 A 2)
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 17 %, from 30% to 36% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %, from 9750 sf
to
6659 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 75 ft to
50 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to.2385 sf.(850.11
Subd 6 A 2)
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 17 %, from 30% to 36% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %,from 9750 sf to
6638 sf.(850.11 Subd 5.A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 75 ft to
50 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 132 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A 2)
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 17 %, from 30% to 36% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
Each of these measures is a standard set by the City to test and reinforce the compatibility of the
design of new development with the character of the. neighborhood it will be placed in. In an
earlier report the City staff established lot width as the most important test. We think each is an
important test, and and are troubled by the number of multiple and excessive flaunting of of these
very basic measures of compatibility.
3
C. The need for an orderly process.
The findings the Commission and Council must make to grant the necessary variances required
for this development to the developer are clear. To Grant the variances of the required lot area,
width and depth, the city must find:
to
the
810.05 Variances .... shall grant variances only upon-finding that an unusual hardship
exists as to the land within the plat or subdivision, and specifically that:
A. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience;
B. The hardship is due to the particular physical surroundings, shape or
topographical condition of the land;
C. The condition or..conditions upon which the request for a variance is based are
unique to the property being platted or subdivided and not generally applicable
other property;
D. The hardship is caused by this Section and not by the applicant;
E. The variance will result in an improved plat or subdivision; and
F. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the land within
plat or subdivision or in the neighborhood.
To grant variances to the required setback and building coverage standards the City must find:
850.04 Subd.1, F. Findings For Variances. The Board shall not grant a petition for a
variance unless it finds that the strict enforcement of this Section would cause undue
hardship because of circumstances unique to the petitioner's property and that the grant of
said variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Section. "Undue hardship"
means that
(i) the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use as allowed by this
Section;
(ii) the plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the - petitioner's
property which were not created by the petitioner; and
(iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the property or
its surroundings.
Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use
for the petitioner's property exists under the terms of this Section.
4
We understand the Code also provides "A favorable vote by the Board shall be deemed to
include a.favorable finding on each of the foregoing matters even if not specifically set out in the
approval resolution or the minutes of the Board meeting" for the building coverage and setback
variances, but in this case we believe the number degree and impact of the needed variances
requires the City to make a clear and specif c decision on each required finding before any
variance is granted. Neither the developer or your staff has enumerated, much less make
arguments for granting these variances.
We cannot understand how the conditions necessary for your approval are present in-this
application. The proposed subdivision must therefore not be approved.
D. Use of subareas.
During this process the applicant has tried to apply a definition of "Neighborhood" that is
different than the definition adopted by the City. That definition is found in 810.02, Subd. 1, the
definitions section of the Plats and Subdivision regulations. The City definition is:
Neighborhood. All lots in the Single Dwelling Unit District as established by Section 850 of this
Code which are wholly or partially within 500 feet of the perimeter of the proposed plat or
subdivision, except:
A. Lots used for publicly owned parks, playgrounds, athletic
facilities and golf courses;
B. Lots used for conditional uses as established by Section 850 of
this Code; or
C. Lots separated from the proposed plat or subdivision by the
right of way of either T. H. 100 or T. H. 62.
and,
"If the neighborhood includes only a part of a lot, then the whole of that lot.shall be included in
the neighborhood. As to streets on the perimeter of the proposed plat or subdivision, the 500 feet
shall be measured from the common line of the street and the proposed plat or subdivision."
The concept of using subareas has been anticipated in the Code. The sole reason to exclude
some parts of the Neighborhood and include others is provided in exception "C And, while
Interlachen is carrying more traffic, it does not rise to the level of Highways 100 or 62 in dividing
neighborhoods.
s
If a subarea must -be recognized, it should be- the'Interlachen frontage.. This is the most important
frontage to all of us as it is our gateway and establishes the essential character of the
neighborhood.
This is a flawed proposal. The only benefits are economic and flow solely to the present owners
and the developer. The costs of this incompatible development to the character and`beauty of our
neighborhood will be borne by those of us who live nearby, by everyone using Interlachen Blvd.,
and, by the precedent you would: set by approving the required variances, every resident of Edina
who trusts the City to assure. compatible development in its neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
6
ff I
ROO T -5
pjmmwmmEmmi
INITFRI Ar.HFN RI VD,�
Roger A.
Anderson
&
Associates,
Inc.
C I S 11, E
N C I N F E R I
N G
C 0 N S U L T
A N T S
7415 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE
107 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55426
TEL (952) 546-7036 FAX (952) 546-0885
u.
LOCATION MAP
NOT TO SCALE
[I
0 10 20 40
SCALE IN FEET
LEQAL—DEaQ—RlPTlQN-
-OTS 1, 2, AND 3, BLOCK 5 BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS, HENNEPIN COUNTY, M
MEAN LOT WIDTH:
59'
MEDIAN LOT WIDTH:
50'
MEAN LOT DEPTH:
130'
MEDIAN LOT DEPTH:
136'
MEAN LOT AREA:
7671 SF
MEDIAN LOT AREA:
6728 SF
5LL ArTACHMENT TO PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FOR COMPLETE
PROPERTY OWNERS LIST AND LOT DIMENSIONS (INFORMATION SUPPLIED
BY JMS DEVELOPMENT)
BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS P.U.D. PLANNED UNIT DE"VELOPMEN'T
EDINA, MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY" rF'J"LAT
jMS DEVELOPMENT
EROSION CONTROL NOTES.
1. GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF ALL
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WITH THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANIES
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION,
2. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES CALLED FOR ON THESE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, WHICH MAY INCLUDE SILT FENCE, SEDIMENTATION BASINS
OR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAPS, SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AND SERVICEABLE
IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
A. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES A MINIMUM OF 50 FEET.
B. SILT FENCE.
C. STRAW BALE BARRIERS AT NO- CUT /NO FILL LOCATIONS.
D. TEMPORARY CULVERTS.
E. TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AND OUTFALL FACILITIES.
F. STORM WATER POND CONSTRUCTION.
G. COMMON EXCAVATION AND EMBANKMENT {GRADING )
H. SEED AND MULCH OR SOD.
1. STRAW BALE BARRIERS IN FINISHED GRADED AREAS.
J. INLET AND OUTLET FACILITIES SUBSEQUENT TO STORM SEWER WORK.
3. GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND
IMPLEMENT ANY ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES NECESSARY IN
ORDER TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTY.
4. ALL EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE
CONTRACTOR DURING GRADING OPERATIONS. ANY TEMPORARY FACILITIES WHICH
ARE TO BE REMOVED AS CALLED FOR ON THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE GRADING CONTRACTOR WHEN DIRECTED BY THE
ENGINEER. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL THEN RESTORE THE SUBSEQUENTLY
DISTURBED AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
5. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULE THE SOILS ENGINEER SO THAT
CERTIFICATION OF ALL CONTROLLED FILLS WILL BE FURNISHED TO THE OWNER
DURING AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT.
6. ALL DISTURBED AREAS EXCEPT STREETS, SHALL BE COVERED WITH A
MINIMUM 4" OF TOP SbIL. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED
& MULCHED AT THE PRESCRIBED RATES WITHIN 72 HOURS OF
FINAL GRADING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
SEED MIX: MNDOT NO. 500 50 #/ACRE
MULCH TYPE 1 2 TONS /ACRE (DISK ANCHORED)
FERTILIZER: 150#/ACRE
7. THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND CONTOUR ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE
PLAN WERE TAKEN FROM A PLAN FURNISHED BY OWNER.
8. CONTRACTORS GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL OPERATIONS SHALL TAKE
PLACE WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS.
9. IT IS REQUIRED THAT SOILS TRACKED FROM THE SITE BY MOTOR VEHICLES
BE CLEANED DAILY FROM PAVED ROADWAY SURFACES THROUGHOUT THE
DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION.
10. PROVIDE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AS DIRECTED BY THE
ENGINEER.
11. ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOCAL WATERSHED DISTRICT SHALL BE
SATISFIED PER THE APPROVED PERMIT.
12. ALL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTED IN THE FIELD AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER SHALL CONFORM TO THE MPCA'S
"PROTECTING WATER QUALITY IN URBAN AREAS: BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR MINNESOTA ".
EROSION CONTROL SCHEDULE
OF INSTALLATION & MAINTENANCE
ITEM INSTALLATION W P QnQoK_A_MAINMMNC REMDYAL
INSPECT & MAINT. AFTER TRIBUTARY
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT AFTER EACH RUN -OFF DRAINAGE AREA IS
SILT FENCE OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS, EVENT. REMOVE SEDIMENTS RESTORED.
AS REQUIRED.
ROCK CONST. PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT INSPECT REGULARLY. PRIOR TO PAVING.
ENTRANCE OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS. MAINTAIN AS NEEDED.
INSPECT & MAINTAIN NO REMOVAL
SEED & MULCH AFTER FINAL GRADING AFTER HEAVY RAINS. NECESSARY.
OPERATIONS. REPLACE WASH -OUT
AREAS IMMEDIATELY.
NOTE: CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND
REMOVAL OF ALL APPLICABLE EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL ITEMS.
t
•- sir
h M
,., • r +E
�•+�•`t�` yiatt•4
m
lwffilolla&. + # , F
n a o ■. k
MMIMPAIRWOR
A e PLAT
DESCRIPTION OF REMSION!„
Roger . s
Anderson
&
m
Associates,
Inc.
C I V I L E
N G I N E E R I
N G
C O N S U L T
A N T S
7415 WAY ATA BOUI;EVAR , SUITE
107 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55426
TEL (052) 546 -7055 FAX (952) 646-0865
r
r
r
r
rf
t
t
t
r
r'
BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS If-W.D.
EDINA, ''
JMS DEVELOPMENT
0 10 20 40
SCALE IN FEET
UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM USED TO CONTROL PEAK RATES TO MATCH EXISTING RATES
545-24" CPE = 1,712 CF (0.04 ABC —Ft)
GRADING, DRAINlAGEq
EROSION CONTROL PLAN
rr�
r
�
r
\
t
t
BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS If-W.D.
EDINA, ''
JMS DEVELOPMENT
0 10 20 40
SCALE IN FEET
UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM USED TO CONTROL PEAK RATES TO MATCH EXISTING RATES
545-24" CPE = 1,712 CF (0.04 ABC —Ft)
GRADING, DRAINlAGEq
EROSION CONTROL PLAN
CHANGE FROM 5 LOT TO 4 LOT CONFIGURATION
PRELIMINARY PLAT
ff Ar ff
ALT
I I
I JON & MARY JO BARNETT I
i
JL_
N1 TF/ RI A r, HF, N FBI VD
�A_
-�4
Rogrer A.
Anderson
&
Associates,
Inc.
C I v I L FN
G I N E E R I
N G
C 0 N S U L T
A N T S
7415 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE
107 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55426
TEL (952) 546-7035 FAX (952) 546-0885
O
MINNE"ll GREEK ////'--SITE
WA7ERSHED
LOCATION MAP
NOT TO SCALE
01
a.
rr
LEGAL -DESC FBI PTION-
_0TS 1, 2, AND 3. BLOCK 5 13ROOKSIDE HEIGHTS, HENNEPIN COUNTY, M
MEAN LOT WIDTH:
59'
MEDIAN LOT WIDTH:
50'
MEAN LOT DEPTH:
130'
MEDIAN LOT DEPTH:
136'
MEAN LOT AREA-
7671 SF
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PRELlm"'INARY PLAT
EROSION CONTROL NOTES:
1, GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF ALL
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WITH THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANIES
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
2. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES CALLED FOR ON THESE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, WHICH MAY INCLUDE SILT FENCE, SEDIMENTATION BASINS
OR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAPS, SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AND SERVICEABLE
IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
A. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES A MINIMUM OF 50 FEET.
B. SILT FENCE,
C. STRAW BALE BARRIERS AT NO— CUT /NO FILL LOCATIONS.
D. TEMPORARY CULVERTS.
E. TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AND OUTFALL FACILITIES.
F. STORM WATER POND CONSTRUCTION.
G. COMMON EXCAVATION AND EMBANKMENT (GRADING )
H. SEED AND MULCH OR SOD.
L STRAW BALE BARRIERS IN FINISHED GRADED AREAS.
J. INLET AND OUTLET FACILITIES SUBSEQUENT TO STORM SEWER WORK.
3. GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND
IMPLEMENT ANY ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES NECESSARY IN
ORDER TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTY.
4. ALL EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE
CONTRACTOR DURING GRADING OPERATIONS. ANY TEMPORARY FACILITIES WHICH
ARE TO BE REMOVED AS CALLED FOR ON THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE GRADING CONTRACTOR WHEN DIRECTED BY THE
ENGINEER. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL THEN RESTORE THE SUBSEQUENTLY
DISTURBED AREA iN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
5. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULE THE SOILS ENGINEER SO THAT
CERTIFICATION OF ALL CONTROLLED FILLS WILL BE FURNISHED TO THE OWNER
DURING AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT.
6. ALL DISTURBED AREAS EXCEPT STREETS, SHALL BE COVERED WiTH A
MINIMUM 4" OF TOP SbiL. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED
& MULCHED AT THE PRESCRIBED RATES WITHIN 72 HOURS OF
FINAL GRADING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
SEED MIX: MNDOT NO. 500 50# /ACRE
MULCH TYPE 1 2 TONS /ACRE (DISK ANCHORED)
FERTILIZER: 150# /ACRE
7, THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND CONTOUR ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE
PLAN WERE TAKEN FROM A PLAN FURNISHED BY OWNER,
8. CONTRACTORS GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL OPERATIONS SHALL TAKE
PLACE WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS.
9. IT IS REQUIRED THAT SOILS TRACKED FROM THE SITE BY MOTOR VEHICLES
BE CLEANED DAILY FROM PAVED ROADWAY SURFACES THROUGHOUT THE
DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION.
10, PROVIDE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AS DIRECTED BY THE
ENGINEER,
11. ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOCAL WATERSHED DISTRICT SHALL BE
SATISFIED PER THE APPROVED PERMIT.
12, ALL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTED W THE FIELD AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER SHALL CONFORM TO THE MPCA'S
"PROTECTING WATER QUALITY IN URBAN AREAS: BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR MINNESOTA ".
EROSION CONTROL SCNEDIJLE
OF INSTALLATION AINTENANCE
tgm iNSTALLAlION iNSTION &MAIN NANCE REMDYAL
INSPECT & MAINT. AFTER TRIBUTARY
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT AFTER EACH RUN —OFF DRAINAGE AREA iS
SiLT FENCE OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS. EVENT. REMOVE SEDIMENTS RESTORED,
AS REQUIRED.
ROCK CONST. PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT INSPECT REGULARLY. PRIOR TO PAVING.
ENTRANCE OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS. MAINTAIN AS NEEDED.
INSPECT & MAINTAIN NO REMOVAL
SEED & MULCH AFTER FINAL GRADING AFTER HEAVY RAINS. NECESSARY.
OPERATIONS. REPLACE WASH —OUT
AREAS IMMEDIATELY.
NOTE: CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND
REMOVAL OF ALL APPLICABLE EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL ITEMS.
WIRE MESH REINFORCEMENT
(OPTIONAL)
ENGINEERING FABRIC
METAL OR WOOD
POST OR STAKE
R #'
(SECTION 6.3, MPCA'S -BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES*)
♦ v ♦ '#
+rir��i •'s �' +rx � ®+ + p;
NOT # SCALE
ml
ADDED STORMWATER RUNOFF DETENTION- S,YSTEMI
CHANGE pp ! TO S
PRELIMINARY
DESCRIPTION
DESIGNED;
t TJ
DRAWN:
PSH
CHECKED BY:
r
e
e ;
w
z
r
Roger A.
Anderson
&
Associates,
10 YEAR
1,78 Cfs
ERIN
G
C 0 N S U L T
A N T S
7415 WAY ATA BOT)TZVARD, STJTTR
107 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55426
TEL (952) 546 -7035 FAX (952) 546- -0365
f
,
HOt
1\
Lo
\
Al",
\
vv
`
__
.
H?
DT
fn
\�
� s�
\
\
i
T_ 19
I
I
RET I IN iA�L
I
Lp
I
t
r
e
e ;
w
z
r
Roger A.
Anderson
&
Associates,
10 YEAR
1,78 Cfs
ERIN
G
C 0 N S U L T
A N T S
7415 WAY ATA BOT)TZVARD, STJTTR
107 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55426
TEL (952) 546 -7035 FAX (952) 546- -0365
r
0,75 Cf5
1.27 Cfs
f:
10 YEAR
1,78 Cfs
2.47 Cfs
0.69 CfS
100 YEAR
3.28 Cfs
r\
0.81 CfS
f
,
EDINA, MINNESOTA
JIMS DEVELOPMENT
At
NORTH
2 YEAR
0,75 Cf5
1.27 Cfs
N S. a
0.52 Cfs
10 YEAR
1,78 Cfs
2.47 Cfs
0.69 CfS
100 YEAR
3.28 Cfs
4.09 Cfs
0.81 CfS
UNDERGROUND DETENTiON SYSTEM USED TO CONTROL PEAK RATES TO MATCH EXISTING RATES
545' -24" CPE - 1,712 CF (0404 Ac—Ft)
GRADING, DRAINA
Ll
EROSION CONTROL PLAN
To: Edina Planning Commission
From: Bruce and Kim Johnson
Date: 10/26/00
Re: The proposed subdivision on Oxford Ave
Kim and I live at 5016 Oxford Avenue next door to the proposed subdivision for
Lots 1,2 and 3 Block 5 Brookside Heights. We were initially thrilled to hear of a
redevelopment project for the proposed site. However, upon learning that the
project involved subdividing 3 modest lots into 5 lots that could be as small as 35
feet our view of the project changed.
In our opinion the project as proposed seems too large for the site. If the project
could be scaled back to a reasonable size we would welcome a modification of the
existing properties. I am sure that Nancy and Jeff Schoenwetter are fine developers
and could find a way to use the site effectively.
We have complete faith that the Planning Commission has the best interests of all
parties involved and will find the proper resolution.
Thank you for your consideration of this issue.
Kim and Bruce Johnson
Kvm
IlVMUA-
q?
City of Edina
-- Original Message--- -
From: tvguy @gwest.net [SMTP:tvguy@gwest.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 11:15 AM
To: EdinaMail@ ci.edina.mn.us;.tvguy @gwest.net
Subject: URGENT! Attn: Edina Planning Dept.
November 1, 2000
Attn: Edina Planning Dept.
RE: Proposed Rezoning in Brookside Heights
Dear Edina City Planners,
I am writing to express my strong concern for the proposed rezoning of
the residential property located at the southwest corner of Oxford Ave.
and Interlachen Blvd. These properties are 5012 Oxford Ave. and 5343
Interlachen Blvd, Edina, MN 55436, legally described as Lots-1,2 and 3,
Block 5, Brookside Heights.
The proposed subdivision involves dividing the existing parcel into five
home sites, each with a width of only 35 feet.
Although I strongly feel that something needs to be done to the existing
parcel, dividing it into five lots and building row -type houses on the
property is NOT the answer. The end result will be detrimental and will
have a drastic and long- lasting affect on the overall look, feel and
character of our surrounding neighborhood.
All of the surrounding homes are single family structures, most of which
are single or 1 -1/2 stories in height and were built at or around the
same time. As a result, their size, design, look, and feel complement
each other. Each contributes, rather than distracts from the continuity
of the neighborhood. The addition of a series of multi -level "row
houses" crammed into this space at one of the main "entrances" to the
neighborhood will surely distract. They will NOT complement, enhance or
contribute to the character of our existing neighborhood.
Friends who visit my home often comment on the "quaint" and "homey" feel
of my neighborhood. I'm sure my neighbors have received similar
comments. I, for one, want to keep this feel of the neighborhood that .
has existed for over 50 years. The late Kay Tierney, who lived next door
to these properties, fought for years to have the properties improved.
I'm sure she'd be ecstatic to know that something is finally being done.
However, I know for a fact that this was not her vision. Nor is it mine.
In Kaye's memory, and for the sake of my current and future neighbors,
DO NOT allow the proposed subdivision to proceed as currently planned.
Sincerely,
Dan Pederson
tg.P�Itoro Ave.
1 (952) 927 -8861
FAX (952) 826 -0390
TDD (952) 826 -0379
Debra Strege
5113 Oxford Avenue
Edina, MN 55436 -2121
October 27, 2000
City of Edina
Planning Commission
Craig Larsen
4801 West 50" Street
Edina, MN 55424 -1330
Dear Mr. Larsen:
I am one of many neighbors who are concerned by the rezoning proposal for the
residential property located at the southwest corner of Interlachen Boulevard and
Oxford Avenue. I believe my fellow neighbors and I will be detrimentally affected
by this proposed development. Not only will we experience increased
congestion on our quiet, dead end street, we will lose the homogeneity of our
properties, suffer reduced property values, and lose the quiet enjoyment to which
we are entitled.
I am very disappointed in the City for displaying its allegiance to this "future
revenue generator' and showing disregard to this community. I find it appalling
that you have allowed this developer to deliberately disguise his or her intentions
to divide the three corner lots by posting your "proposed subdivision" sign only
on Oxford Avenue and not on the more traveled Interlachen Boulevard. Frankly,
I am outraged that you have ignored this action for as long as you have. How
long will you allow him or her to get away with deceiving your citizens? This
appears as a blatant disregard for us. The longer you allow it, the worse you
look! It is shameful!
We are a group of middle- income owners of modest Edina homes. At the very
least, as Edina taxpayers, we deserve the respect and consideration that is
being granted to building developers Nancy and Jeff Schoenwetter, even if our
pockets are not as deep! I realize my words are harsh, but I want to
demonstrate my feelings and those of my neighbors about what has transpired.
Please be prepared for a room full of outraged citizens on November 1 st
Respectfully,
41 Debra Strege
i
V
CcJ
;a
•
Norine Larson
Oct. 30, 2000
Dear City Planner and City Council Members,
We have lived on Oxford Ave. for the past 30 years. We have seen many
neighbors come and go. We have seen none quite like the neighbor who has
now presented a plan to you for the rezoning of 5343 Interlachen Blvd. and
5012 Oxford Ave. Over the years we have seen him make a joke out of
most Edina home ordinances as well as those who tried to enforce them.
If any neighbor complained about his unsightly mess he would show up at
their door and threaten bodily harm. We feel this plan is his retaliation to
the petition all the neighbors signed this summer to get him to comply
with the ordinances the rest of us live with.
A clear demonstration of his attitude can be seen by a drive by his
property. He had created a "driveway" by parking his truck up on his lawn.
When the new curbs were put in last summer the access to this
"driveway" was eliminated by the curb. He has now destroyed this curb
and continues to park his truck on the lawn! The sign he was told to put on
Interlachen to inform people of the proposed subdivision is actually hidden
behind a telephone pole on Oxford. He was told to move it to make it legal
but as in so many issues he has thumbed his nose at that directive.
Edina's rules obviously do not apply to him!!!!!
This new proposal will change the whole nature of a beautiful, quiet
family street. It will affect the re -sale value of all our homes. We urge
you to please not let this bully win!!!
Sincerely,
.C�
r ey and Norine Larson
' 5121 Oxford Ave.
5121 Oxford Avenue • Edina, Minnesota 55436 • (612) 925 -2437
mar
Nt
OFA
I (IN \u
(.�l I IL111LI
r771
1111-LL I ILI ly,
L L L HO %L t I
ALI L L 11 111
LA� %- t it L
(,t j �u I V L k 1. L L L LL L. L I LL I I L I I
jL Lr �%-U LI L i \1 1. 1 L
I I / L 0� L I
L LLJ LI I
I kill
Vk rr
At
IHLLL L IL
L Lac
rl
U L I
L
Af
.f L
\\Vl t ( fit
If I('/ L
I U
4i-
�7t. � � �
� -� •�' d' �' ��- �>• Tom- '?�� � .�-�� � / r i / �r I )C
rr'�'� -. �l n� IIIt UOtlli 11 l
M � -� � l� ICI _ 4r. �J 'dlll Il llL�'.Ll:.iltL � _•� ll i .
-_ - -T � LCI(ll.l , [ , ,(
�¢ �( l l Litt tL� .
-�_ .- - - - - -- — =- _ _ — =— t- eGillfl �. ;LCtL rL�(�U.c r rLc�LltL,lr.rli� (.11_t r1
Irl,(I(/r --- -- -
(U(�.L �ll(Ll�ltfl.ttr. ! `
rrrral
��-- - -_' 01 l(LLLLCLL I
/� llll r.. �Lil� l
�kll }�, LI_ l It r�. �l / J I UL� /I / //l [ g",
t [ll ._LlccrlllI111 /� _14( % (A L I LLL(( �[ct�clL,._. . r �<<� ��..�uCUli� crl•�l(( (_� `��
�l 1l�I `�LLIJi(l t,�LLL1Ll.� � l.� �� (!;(
LLCt_LL((.(L( �ll(I(c
LLl L[ l tL "L ,(( S�(Jl/lln/r u.
[•ttlu fILI(t ( u(r,,.
rL�Llt �(rlf11111 /ir(t f(cfctVlltrrr
(/ �LCLI Lt'
ILCG[(c,
ob
L
1
{
�1ASL
f 1< n
�► • ',� .. �/ _ '� lit _ .F' .�:
J ter---" °ice` =' y'� � t �.: ��_ �' '���• -' =sue. �.'� =' •i'�' / `. v!'�
. My
ipl�l�ciirl I ,! fur_ �_ I JII�J9l =�3,. N
, WWA
�� ICU f m r � �iL• -•�' � 1n
rm
1
�t j✓iuo*a
(7 -4
4-a
0
jc
Nvr
V3,3
11413.,/SC7`' A..) ?- -
INA
/ -3 Orr., 5 /3
-:2-4 34
�CZ'
A,Trj�U4 COULI-
L
.5--s Yo /K 41�, & Y.T
6 t 3 6A P—D
ea '--7 1 7A- S - 5 -1/- 5, E
t Ir 8VAI/16- -
6— Clk so Uut:A- IAW j`--5vj6
rje;7
/o' �' C� �c�-� I1r U• ��
IV A-6i
ZT113
13 9 W Flne-D Ca,,Oof Alm
53/q �oa U.) oj A4/v 56�13
7Yla,��' %i',sal.,��
fir.. ��,� .
C ii�9 U//
I
JL
AIX/ Z� Z�446S bfL /vIQ
S �v� ,1y�e,Q L/�G � �`�o
53(;k
i17
I
Good Evening
Edina city council
January 16, 2001
JMS Homes, Inc.
Oxford Villas
tips ..
in
History
• Currently three (3) home sites
• We were looking for approval for five (5)
home sites: tonight we request approval for
four (4).
• The simple answer is raise existing homes,
apply for 3 permits:
— No park ices
— No SAC' /WAC'
A`e
1
Site
L
Chan,;es to Site Plan Requested
• Deleted one home site (five to four)
• Increased lot width and area
• Reviewed as "an award winning project"
• Engineering quote " perhaps the best in -fill
redevelopment"
®��1+ SCa�mp�nln
Our Immediate Neighbors
• Look forward to this approval
• Look forward to "renewal" of site
• Are interested in ownine these low
maintenance homes (if kept affordable)
• Anticipate greater safety -no curb cuts
Current Three Lot Plat
3
BeverIv Hills Neighbors
^Oppose plans m'nocx'-site
^Compare the proposed lot sizes mtheir
"bncy" ucighhm1wnd VUSLIS /hcnmo
osenr.| Bnmksidcmciuhhodvods
cmnfon:h|ckr|
`Are concerned abm |mcdachen Blvd set-
backs /] (i"mt.v Road) ..... not xcmmtr,
6mc
Interlachcn Set-Backs
4
5
rel
Itrlerlachen Set -Backs
7
_Nts
Interlachen Set
Interlachen Set -Backs
__.._,.,.... Additional Concerns
• Extenskc work with staffand planning
commission completed creating a
thou httill plat
• Drainagc- cvc ha%c an cndorscd plan (by
ell_I Ilcers ),
•
Land arCa Calculations- eel-tified and
rcV lowed
0
�'' °'� �',mp.•, . Additional Concerns
• Proposed homes are significantly under hardcover
allowance (see graph)
• No building or set -back variances required with
proposed pontes
Just „tip..
The Future
• Your forward vision:
- My children will grow up new Edina
- The bowling alley is now Davannis and
Blockbuster
- The gravel pit is a multi -plea cinema
- My grade school is gone
u!!n-mpan,e.
We Request Approval
• Vision Ior area -
• Renewal of housing stock
• 35 years ago Edina
• Today's Edina
W
Yale Model
� I
q p�
Yale Model
•
Arts and Crafts Stylized Cottage
• Thoughtful Covered Entry
• Front Elevation of Premium Materials
— Brick
— Shakes
— Dimensional Shingles
jim su c
10
Princeton Model
• Inspired by Colonial Architecture
• Features Three Architectural Gables
• Covered Easy Accessible Enhance
•
Marvin Double Hunk Windows
!WM4 Comomk�
Harvard Model
• American Classic Design
• Shake and Cut Stone Elevation
• Dutch Hip Roof
• One- Level Living (Adaptable to Universal
Design)
I Im MIS
12
Floor Plan-
^ Comh/nuh|cshckued front Porch
oo����:�
wc|comcyou,6ucmx
^ GcnonuxFo'r,
^ GounnoKinhcn
^
Main Lc,d Vwnc,'s Kurcut
. Fnnnu| 0nin, and Great Room
^
Choice nf3UIdVu, Third Car Garage
Floor Plan- Second Level
^ Choiccof Two o, Three Bedrooms
^ 0cncmu, Compartmentalized 0ucstBath
MUltiple Loft Potential
13
EMMI
Floor Plan- Optional Lower Level
• Features Genel-OLIS Windows
• Optional Recreational Room
• Optional Office
• Potential Guest Suite
• Potential Spa and Exercise Areas
• Potential Bar and Wine Cellar
Thotwhtful Design to Alm-ket Demand
• Benefits
—Single Family Residences
• Compliments existing neighborhood
• Architectural Integrity
• Ftiliancement ofneighborhood value
— Demographics of'Edina
• Move down empty nesters
• Ansxkcrs lite-cycle-,'universal housing needs
14
Thou ` rht /ul Design to Market Demand
• Benefits
— Consistent with all new in -fill
developments- compatibility in design
— Efficient Land Plan- Creation of lino urban retreats
• 011crs affordability
• Reduces urban sprawl
pt��y,•t„
Thoughoid Design to lvlarlcet Demand
• Benefits
—Home Finished Areas
• Main Living Level- 1351sq.ft.
• Second Floor- 808 sq.ft.
• Lower Level- 1200 sq.ft
• "r%vo Car Garage 454 sq.ft.
• Total Potential Livine Area >3300sq.ft.
Jats c•ma.•r,
We Request Your Approval._,,
• COUra!ge to embrace change.... u,raham Lincoln
• Consensus is a poor form of leadership ... jar*
Welch. ('r_o,,fcr
• Great Ideas fail only due to lack of execution.
/effSrhoemwiter. CEO o(. /.11S
• Edinas' Strategic Plan.... objectives include
" redevelopment" and "life -cycle housing"
Nts
15
Thank Yoic!
• Telephone- (952) 949 -3630
• Web -site- wwwjms- homes.com
• e -mail- jms- homes @aol.com
16
Richard R. Miller
5340 Hollywood Road
Edina, MN 55436
January 10, 2001
Dear Councilmember Housh:
Next Tuesday, the City Council will hold a hearing on a proposal to join two existing,
buildable lots located at 5343 Interlachen Boulevard and 5012 Oxford Avenue. The
developer proposes to subdivide this newly joined single lot into four lots.
The Planning Commission initially approved this proposal on November 29th, as staff
recommended. This proposal was reheard by the Planning Commission on January 3rd,
because the initial vote was based on erroneous information supplied by the developer,
that was unverified by staff.
Based on corrected information supplied by nearby residents, the Planning Commission
reversed its earlier approval, by a vote of 8 -1. It is my understanding that the planning
staff continues to recommend approval, in spite of the fact that it would require 25
separate variances from the city's subdivision and zoning codes. Moreover, no hardship
was claimed, as required by state law.
The developer has introduced novel definitions of "neighborhood" and redefined
"intervening use" in an effort to justify this proposal. The attached aerial photo with a
properly scaled subdivision overlay clearly shows how incompatible this would be with
the existing neighborhood. Even worse from a community perspective, construction
would extend far into the existing setback along Interlachen Boulevard, one the Edina's
most beautiful roads.
Over the past two months, I have discussed this with dozens of neighbors, 50 of whom
have attended the Planning Commission meetings. While everyone agrees that the
property needs to be improved, neighborhood sentiment is overwhelming opposed to
this inappropriate scheme. We respectfully ask that you vote to sustain the Planning
Commission's recommendation, and reject this proposal.
Enclosed is a copy of my letter to the Planning Commission which discusses the issues
regarding the City's code. Also enclosed is a memorandum for Mr. Peter Leeders,A
which analyzes the proposal as it relates to lot sizes and Brookside Heights I ask- that -'
you - ude-both _ in_the- record of-Tuesday's_pu6lic.,hearing�
Sincerely,
� %/ - ,r
Va?f
kilt
January-3; 2001
Mr. Gordon Johnson, Chair
City Planning Commission
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
RE: Preliminary Plat, JMS, Inc., Brookside Heights
Dear Chair Johnson and Members of the Commission
We, as neighbors. of the property at Oxford and'Interlachen Boulevard request the Commission
not approve the Plat as proposed. We recognize that while redevelopment of at least the
northerly parcel may be timely, we ask you reject the this development that is the intent of the
presently proposed plat for these reasons.
1. The rotation of the orientation of the northerly lots from their present platting, and the
established platting and development of the other parcels fronting on Interlachen Blvd in
the neighborhood, will create a severe conflict and disruption of the established pattern of
development in the neighborhood.
2. This development, if permitted, because of its aggressiveness and resulting
noncompliance with the minimum standards of the code, will require 25 separate
variances. These standards that must be varied to approve the subdivision ensure
compatible massing and rhythm with the present development of the neighborhood.
These many and comprehensive variances of the of the City's adopted protections, and the
proposed reversed orientation to Interlachen Blvd, will alter the essential, character of the
neighborhood and the experience of Interlachen Blvd, the entry way to our neighborhood
and homes.
3. The process must be orderly and the. Commission and Council must follow the adopted
rules when considering this application. While redevelopment of lots 1 and 2 could be
welcome, this is not an exceptional property, and virtually none of the conditions required
for support in granting the needed variances by 810.05 Subd. 1 A -F and 850.04 Subd. 1 F
are present at this site or claimed by the developer.
4. The use of a Neighborhood "subarea" to establish minimum standards is not permitted.
The concept of using subareas has been anticipated in the Code. The only division into
subareas is provided for in 810.02 Subd. 1 Definition of Neighborhood, C,, is in the case
of T. H. 100 or T. H. 62. If any subarea is used in-this case; it- should consist of the
homes along Interlachen Blvd.
A. Proposed Orientation to Interlachen Blvd
In addition to the quantitative measures of compatibility carried in the City setback and other
requirements, the entire plan is flawed in its orientation to Interlachen. Figure One is a 1 inch
equals 100 ft scaled site plan placed on and aerial photo of the neighborhood along Interlachen
Blvd. The disrespect of this plan for the neighbors who live on.and use Interlachen is appalling.
This .sife plan, with its intrusion into the established setback and character along Interlachen
Blvd, will stand out like a sore thumb in our neighborhood.
B. Proposed Variances
In contrast with expanding or rebuilding a home on an existing platted lot, which is regulated by
Section 850 Subd,-,20 C. Non - Conforming Lots, to approve the proposed subdivision the City is
required to provide the following variances from the applicable regulations:
Lot 1
Lot 2
to
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 9750 sf
to
6493 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 35 %, from 75 ft to
48.7 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum building coverage.by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A2)
5. To increase the maximum building coverage by 20 %, from 30% to 37% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
7. To reduce the required side street setback.along Interlachen by 82% or 84 %, from
53.6 ft (850.1.1 Subd 7 A. 1), or, 48 ft (850.11 Subd 7 A. 2), to 8 1/2 ft.
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %, from 9750 sf
6659 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2-. To- reduce -the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood-by -33 %, from -75 ft to
50 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A 2)
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 17 %, from 30% to 36% of the area of
the. lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2).
Lot 3
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %, from 9750 sf
to
6659 sf (850.11 Subd ,5 A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood. by 33%,. from 75 ft to
50 ft. 050.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 133 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A 2)
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 17 %, from 30% to 36% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11.Subd 6 B 2)
Lot 4
1. To reduce the minimum lot area required in this neighborhood by 32 %,from 9750 sf to
6638 sf (850.11 Subd 5 A 1)
2. To reduce the minimum lot width required in this neighborhood by 33 %, from 75 ft to
50 ft. (850.11 Subd 5 B)
3. To reduce the required minimum lot depth by 3 %, from 136 ft. to 132 ft.
4. To increase the maximum Building coverage by 6 %, from 2250 sf to 2385 sf (850.11
Subd 6 A 2).
5. To increase the maximum Building Coverage by 17 %, from 30 % to 36% of the area of
the lot (850.11 Subd 6 A 2)
6. To reduce the required rear setback by 20 %, from 25 ft to to 20 ft. (850.11 Subd 6 B 2)
Each of these measures is a standard set by the City to test and reinforce the compatibility of the
design of new development with the character of the neighborhood it will be placed in. In an
earlier report the City staff established lot width as the most important test. We think each is an
important test, and and are troubled by the number of multiple and excessive flaunting of of these
very basic measures . of compatibility.;4'
'3
3.
C. The need for an orderly process.
The findings the Commission and Council must make to grant the necessary variances required
for this development to the developer are clear. To Grant the variances of the required lot area,
width and depth, the city must find:
to
the
810.05 Variances .... shall grant variances only upon finding that an unusual hardship
exists as to the land within the ,plat or-'subdivision, and specifically that:
A. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience;
B. The hardship is due to the particular physical surroundings, shape or
topographical. condition of the land;
C. The condition or conditions upon which the request fora variance is based are
unique to the property being platted or subdivided and not generally applicable
other property;
D. The hardship is caused by this Section and not by the applicant;
E. The variance will result in an improved plat or subdivision; and
F. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the land within
plat or subdivision or in the neighborhood.
To grant variances to the required setback and building coverage standards the City must find:
850.04 Subd.1, F. Findings For Variances. The Board shall not grant ,a petition for a
variance unless it finds that the strict enforcement of this Section would cause undue
hardship because of circumstances unique to the petitioner's property and that the grant of
said variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Section. "Undue hardship"
means that
(i) the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use as allowed by this
Section;
(ii) the plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the petitioner's
property which were not created by the petitioner; and
(iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the property or
its surroundings.
Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use
for the petitioner's property exists under the terms of this Section.
2
We understand' the Code also provides "A favorable vote by the Board shall be deemed to
include a favorable finding on each of the foregoing matters even if not specifically set out in the
approval resolution or the minutes of the Board meeting" for the building coverage and setback
variances, but. in this case we believe the number degree and impact of the needed variances
requires the City to make a clear and specific decision on each required finding before any
variance is granted. Neither the developer or your staff has enumerated, much less make
arguments for granting these variances.
We cannot :understand'how the conditions necessary for your approval are present in this
application. The proposed subdivision must therefore not be approved.
D. Use of subareas.
During this process the applicant has tried to apply a definition of "Neighborhood" that is
different than the definition adopted by the City. That definition is found in 810.02, Subd. 1, the
definitions section of the Plats and Subdivision regulations. The City definition is:
Neighborhood. All lots in the Single Dwelling Unit District as established by Section 850 of this
Code which are wholly or partially within 500 feet of the perimeter of the proposed plat or
subdivision, except:
A. Lots used for publicly owned parks, playgrounds, athletic
facilities and golf courses;
B. Lots used for. conditional uses as established by Section 850 of
this Code;. or
C. Lots separated from the proposed plat' or subdivision by the
right of way of either T.H. 100 or T.H. 62.
and,
"If the neighborhood includes only a part of a lot, then the whole of that lot shall be included in
the neighborhood. As to streets on the perimeter of the proposed plat or subdivision, the 500 feet
.shall be measured from the common line of the street and the proposed plat or subdivision."
The concept of using subareas has been anticipated in the Code. The sole reason to exclude
some parts. of the Neighborhood and include others is provided in exception "C ". And, while
Interlachen is carrying more traffic, it does not rise to the level of Highways 100 or 62 in dividing
neighborhoods.
s
If a subarea must be recognized, it should-be the Interlachen frontage. This is the most important
frontage to all of us as it is our gateway arid, establishes the essential character of the
neighborhood.
This is a flawed proposal. The only benefits are economic and flow solely to the present owners
and the developer. The costs of this incompatible development to the character and beauty of our
neighborhood will be borne by'those of us who live nearby, by everyone using Interlachen Blvd.,
and, by the precedent you would set by approving the required variances, every resident of Edina
who trusts the City to assure compatible development in its neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
6
January 3, 2001
From: Peter Leenders
5317 Hollywood Road
Edina, MN 55435
To: Mr. Gordon Johnson, Chair
Planning Commission
City of Edina
4801 W. 50' Street
Edina, Mn 55424
Re: Interlachen /Oxford Subdivision.# S =0075 project,
Comments centering around the Brookside Heights Plat Section
In response to the various comments made during the two prior hearings before the City
Planning Commission, I undertook an analysis of the available property data for the
Brookside Heights Plat section. In defense of the non- conforming definition by the
proponents of `Neighborhood' as meaning only selected parts of Brookside Heights it is
being argued that the proposed 4 lot re- platting would be within the character of the
Oxford Ave. section.
In today's Planning Staff Report you are finally receiving corrected dimensional data for
the Neighborhood as defined by the Edina City Codes. Nevertheless, approval of the
proposed 4 -lot development is still being recommended by the City Planner.
In opposition I would like to direct your attention to the location of the project site, its
configuration and relation to the adjacent properties.
To this end I am submitting to you a total of 10 different Area Maps as described in the
following list.
Peter Leenders'1 /03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 1
OFFICIAL CITY OF EDINA MAP
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 2
EDINA PLANNING DEPT. LOCATION MAP, SUBDIVISION #S -00 -5
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 3
JMS APPLICATION, 500 FT NEIGHBORHOOD
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 4
MAP SECTION 3C,
ORIGINAL PLATTING OF BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS SECTION
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 5
R -1 ZONE OF MAP SECTION 3C
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE.# 6
MAP REF. #5, PROPOSED. SUBDIVISION. OVERLAYED
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 7
SOUTH INPERLAKEN BLOCK SECTION BETWEEN OXFORD AVE. AND SKYLINE DRIVE Peter
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 8
AERIAL VIEW OF NEIGHBORHOOD
Peter Leenders 1 /03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 9
= MAP REF. # 8, PLA T GRID O VERLA FED
Peter Leenders 1/03/2001
MAP REFERENCE # 10
=MAP REF. # 9,2X SCALE
The importance of Interlachen Blvd to the neighborhood and the entire NW Section of
Edina is apparent from a study of map Ref. #1. It connects the neighborhoods to 501'
Street, Vernon Ave. and HY 100 to the East, and to Blake Road to the West. It has so far
maintained its character as a pleasant typical neighborhood road, comparable to other
similar `thoroughfares' such as Woodale Ave. It deserves to be viewed as an artery rather
than a dividing feature in the neighborhood.
Interlachen Blvd. is an integral element of the Brooside Heights Section. A study of the
only partly updated original P1at.Map for Brookside Heights, Ref. #4, shows the initial
orientation of the northern -most parcels toward Interlachen Blvd.
I am referring here to the section between the South Side of Interlachen Blvd and the
demarcation line of the original E =W Alley as the Interlachen Strip of Brookside
Heights. Please note that the key parcel to be subdivided per the proposal represents the
western limit of the strip (Ref. #5).
ANALYSIS OF BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS PLAT.
The Brookside Height Plat appears to have originated as far back as the 1930s or 40s. It
suggests an initial number of 19 parcels in the Interlachen Strip, all aligned in a N -S
direction facing Interlachen Blvd. The uniform initial N'S dimension of these parcels was
130 ft. Where the bordering Alley sections have been abandoned, the affected lots are
now 137 ft. North to South (except for'Rowland's Addition). 15 of- the'initial parcels had
an E -W dimension of 54 -ft to 55 ft. Both, the two parcels.at the' eastern.limit.ofthe
Interlachen Sirip.and at its western limit were 67 ft,to 68 ft E -W (i.e. width along
Interlachen Blvd).
Through combining some :adjoining parcels, the number of distinct lots within the
Interlachen Strip has been reduced to a total of 15. All parcel combinations within the
Interlachen Strip; as is "the case throughout the Brookside resulted in1arger lots. This is
indicated in the following summary.
NUMBER OF ADDRESSES IN R-1 DISTRICT OF BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS AND
LARGER LOTS CREATED BY COMBINATIONS OF ORIGINAL PLAT
PARCELS.
Interlachen Strip 15 Addresses 4 Combinations / 27% of total
Oxford Ave. 26 15 / 58% of total
Bedford Ave. 40 4 / 10% of total
William Ave.
38
4
/
11% of total
Hankerson Ave.
25
7
/
28% of total
Brookside Heights Total 1 144 Addresses 34 Combinations / 24% of Total
ANALYSES OF INTERLACHEN STRIP AND OXFORD AVE PEOPERTY
DIMENSIONS.
5343 Interlachen Blvd. is the key lot in the proposed subdivision. It is located at the NW
Corner of Oxford Ave. and at the West End of the Interlachen Strip. The placement of
the dwelling makes it one lot. The dimensions of this undivided lot are close to the
governing code standards.
The current dimensions of all the lots in the R -1 Section of the Interlachen Strip and
Oxford Ave. are presented in the following studies, titled Plan A, B, C, D.
lots 1193 1,858 144,390
Mean 79.5 123.9 9,619
Median 75 130 8,494
5 of 15 ( =35%) of lots in Plan A are 54 to 55 ft wide
I.e. at the smallest width dimension in this analysis.
lnterlachen/O�dord'data analysis on Brookside Heights Plat
Peter Leenders, Jan 3, 2001
PLAN A, Interlachen South Side to E -W Alley
sq feet
Address
E/W ft
NIS ft
(width)
(depth):
area
5211
Interlachen
68
125
8,500
5215
Interlachen
68
131
8,908
5221
Interlachen
55
137
7,535
5225
Interlachen
54
137
7,398
5233
Interlachen
83
137
11,371
5237
Interlachen
79
137
10,823
5000
William
88
130
11,440
5305
Interlachen
75
130
9,750
5313
Interlachen
108
65
7,020
5005
Bedford
108
65
7,020
5321
Interlachen
109
137
14,933
5329
Interlachen
54
130
7,020
5333
Interlachen
54
130
7,020
5001
Oxford
54
130
7,020
5343
Interlachen
136
137
18,632
lots 1193 1,858 144,390
Mean 79.5 123.9 9,619
Median 75 130 8,494
5 of 15 ( =35%) of lots in Plan A are 54 to 55 ft wide
I.e. at the smallest width dimension in this analysis.
6 of 15 ( =40%) of lots in Plan B are 50 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
1/3/01
PLAN
B Oxford Ave
from Interlachen
Ave South to
End of R -1 Zone
Address
E/W ft
N/S ft
sq feet
(depth)
(width)
area
5343
Interlachen
136
137
18,632
5012
Oxford
135
62
8,370
5016
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5020
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5024
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5028
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5032
Oxford
136
50
6,8'00
5036
Oxford
136
50
6,800
5040
Oxford
136
65
8,840
5044
Oxford
136
65
8,840
5100
Oxford
136
105
14,280
5108
Oxford
137
77
10,549
5112
Oxford
137
80
10,960
5120
Oxford
137
70
9,590
5128
Oxford
137
100
13,700
15 lots
2,043
1,061
144,561
Mean
136
71
9,637
Median
136
65
8,840
6 of 15 ( =40%) of lots in Plan B are 50 ft wide,
I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysis.
1/3/01
PLAN
C
Oxford Ave
= East Side
Address
E/W ft
N/S ft sq
feet
(depth)
(width) area
5001
Oxford
54
130
7,020
5013
Oxford
129
55
7,095
5017
Oxford
129
50
6,450
5021
Oxford
129
7.5
9,675
5029
Oxford
129
75
9,675,
5,033
Oxford
129
50
6,450
5037
Oxford
129
50
6,450
5045
Oxford
129
75
9,675
5101
Oxford
130
77
10,010
5109
Oxford
130
75
9,750
5113
Oxford
130
80
10,400
5121
Oxford
130
70
9,100
5125
Oxford
130
50
6,500
13 lots
1607
912
108,250
Mean
124
70
8,327
Median
129
75
9,100
ti
5 of
13 ( =38%) of lots
in Plan B C
are 50 to 55 ft
wide,
I.e.
at the smallest
dimension in
this analysis.
i,
1/3/01
PLAN D Oxford Ave - East Side plus West Side
Combined Totals
Location of lots E/W ft N/S ft
(depth) (width)
West
Side
of
Oxford
(15)
2,043
1,061
East
Side
of
Oxford
(13)
1,607
912
sq feet
area
144,561
108,250
28 lots - Combined Totals
3,650
1,973
.252,81.1
Mean
130
70
9,029
Median
.135.5
67.5
8,840
11 of 28 lots ( =39%) located in the R -1 district of Oxford Ave
are 50 to 55 ft wide, I.e. at the smallest dimension in this analysi
1/3/01
(insert pages of studies)
CONCLUSIONS
Studying the map references, the relationship of the proposed subdivision to the
Interlachen Strip and to Oxford Ave. leads to the conclusion that the subdivision into 4
lots is not appropriate for maintaining and enhancing the character of the Brookside
Heights Neighborhood.
The only sensible options for development of the property at 5343 Interlachen appear to
be
A. Single dwelling on the current undivided lot
B. A total of two dwellings, one each on 2 lots created by subdivision per the
original plat.
Although B would technically require code variances, I think it can be supported as
fitting the Neighborhood by its dimensions and in comparison to other corner
configurations within the Interlachen Strip.
A prime consideration has to be the creation of a harmonious arrangement of the 4
corners on Interlachen Blvd., Oxford Ave. and Hollywood Rd. It is worth noting that all
other road intersections in Brookside Heights with Interlachen Blvd. involve only 2
corners each, i.e. none of the other roads go across Interlachen.
The present lot at 5012 Oxford fits the neighborhood, although the dwelling does not.
Redevelopment here does not require any combination/subdivision of existing parcels.
In conclusion, I remain totally opposed to the combining/subdivision of the two
involved properties leading to 4 severely undersized lots totally out of the existing
code stipulations and having a severely negative effect on everything dear to us in
the existing neighborhood.
- INTERLACHEN NEIGHBORHOOD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
5340 Hollywood Road, Edina, Mn. 55436
12 January 2001
Jon Larsen
Principal Planner,
658 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Mn 55155
Enclosures:
Environmental Review
Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Developer's drawing of proposed subdivision and surface
water run -off control mechanisms.
Plats and'ariel views of surrounding neighborhood showing
topography and sewer repair work.
Historical documentation.
,P1�ees-, letters, testimonials.
Dear Mr. Larsen:
We request that the EQB forward this petition to the following
RGUs: City of Edina Planning and Zoning Department, Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District, Nine Mile Creek Watershed District,
Hennepin County Transportation Department.
Briefly, the proposed housing development, although only
4 homes, is within 1000' of a protected shoreline and therefore
is not subject to exemption due to the fact that it is
less than 10 homes. It is on land which has served historically
as an area for surface water run -off from the entire surrounding
area from the Vernon Ave. ridge (el. 6,9801) to just southwest
of Interlachen Blvd. and Oxford Ave. (el. 6,930.91) to
pool and be absorbed. Due to changes made by both public
and private individuals and entities, some of which were
officially permitted, others undertaken outside of any
governing authority, that is no longer the case. The watersheds
run together here, and much of the run -off from the south
side of Oxford and Interlachen now flows north for one
half a block where it enters an open water pond, (e.4r888')
which in turn connects up with Minnehaha Creek.
Up until 1971, filling or building on property directly
adjacent to the south side of Interlachen Boulevard was
prohibited in recognition of its importance to flood control
as well as the health of Nine Mile Creek. Such restrictions
were not enforced in the 70's and 801s, and the division
between the Nine -Mile Creek and Minnehaha Creek watersheds
(which, there, is Interlachen Boulevard) became blurred.
It should be noted here that in 1995 the City of Edina
gave the homeowner on one of the properties in question
permission to fill in the ponding areas on his land adjacent
to Interlachen Blvd. The increase in the footprint of
the built environment on this parcel which the developer
proposes is over three times what is there now, and would
exacerbate this problem, be detrimental to both watersheds,
and to the homes down stream in both watersheds.
The project calls for an increase in the "footprint" of
the built environment on the land from approximately J4,000
sq.' to '10,800 sq.'. on one version and 12,900 sq.' on the
other. This would comprise a 2.5 -4 times larger area.
The project is.on-a scooped out slope which goes from 6,940'
el. on the SW to 6;930' el. on the NE. One block to the
south, the street el. to is 6,9801. Three houses to the
north, the elevation falls to 6,920 at the street and 6,890'
along the western perimeter of those lots. Clearly, the
parcel in question, which is 26,470 sq.', and which currently
includes 22,440 sq.' of open space, is a key element in
the manner in which the. surface run -off is absorbed.
In addition, this development represents an increase of
1200 to 2400 gallons of wastewater per day, on a system
which has shown increasing signs of an inability to handle
such increase.
Finally, the area is detrimental to the aesthetic environment
of the Interlachen neighborhood in that it seeks to build
within 8' of Interlachen Boulevard. The current required
setback of 30' was designed for order and harmony as well
as flood control. Uniquely bounded by the Vernon Ave.
commercial area on the south, Highway 100 on the east,
Minnehaha Creek and Interlachen and Meadowbrook Country
Club on the north and west, everything in the area relates
to Interlachen Boulevard. Treating Interlachen Blvd. as
a sidestreet flies in the face of city planning precedents.
Ignoring setback guidelines which have evolved since it
was a country lane would be detrimental to the nature and
character of the neighborhood.
The effected area includes two watershed districts, involves
a county roadway and a city street, and a 50' strip of
NSP property. A facing, downstream- property owner put
up a 6 -foot protective berm of unknown composition without
city or county, permission soon after the subdivision sign
was posted. There is one household well that is of concern
from ground water contamination which lies downstream on
the MC watershed.
We feel we have very reasonable concerns and that this
project would be detrimental to the beauty and health of
the natural and built environment.
Thank you for your considertation.
Yours trul
Carolyn isson
A-\"
Jackie Hoogenakker
From:
James B. Reed [JReed @mn.rr.com]
Sent:
Sunday, January 14, 2001 8,:29 PM
To:
jhoogenakker @ci.edina.mn.us
Cc:
dmaetzold @ci.edina.mn.us; eanderson @ci.edina.mn.us; ghughes @ci.edina.mn.us
Subject:
4 -lot subdivision Oxford Avenue
Dear Edina Planning Commission,
We have lived in Edina a total of 25 years in three different neighborhoods
and have most recently lived at 5100 Oxford Avenue for the last 12 years. We
are unable to make the meeting on Tuesday January 16th, so are submitting
our concerns in this document. We do not support the proposed 4 lot
subdivision on Oxford Avenue for the following reasons:
1. This plan does not support the original plan for our neighborhood as
evidenced by the numerous (as many as 25) variances that are required to
carry out this plan based on the current city code.
2. The crowding of four homes on a property designed for no more than three,
would result in a potential for traffic congestion at an already busy
intersection.
-With each home allowed up to a 3 car garage, 12 more vehicles could be
added to a small space very close to the Interlachen Blvd. intersection.
-There already exits two driveways on the east side of Oxford and an
alleyway that serves the east side of Oxford and the west side of
Bedford lies directly across from the proposed development.
-There is an increase in cut through traffic especially at rush hour
when the intersection of Interlachen and Vernon becomes very congested.
-This congestion will likely increase with the development of the Kunz
Lewis site and the overall traffic in the area increases.
-The intersection of Oxford and Interlachen is also the main pathway for
all of the neighborhood children to get to Todd Park. As parents of
school age children who use this park we are very concerned about the
potential for accidents at this intersection.
3. The 4 lot design leaves very little yard space and if families with
children move in (which we would hope for in a family focused neighborhood)
no play space would encourage more play into the street or more foot traffic
down to Todd Park, both of which could be dangerous (see above).
4. We are puzzled by the decision of the City Planner to support this
proposal in light of a decisive vote from the Planning Commission against it
by 8 to 1 and the vocal opposition by the neighborhood. This certainly
gives the impression that the decision was not made in the best interest of
the community, the neighborhood or the Planning Commission, but was driven
my some other motive.
5. The current proposal has been the only one considered for these lots. It
seem only reasonable that at least one other developer be given the
opportunity to submit a proposal that may meet with the needs of the
neighborhood and community before a final decision is made.
We strongly believe that the 4 lot proposal is not in keeping with the
pattern of the neighborhood and would not be in the best interest of the
community.
We do support a 3 or fewer lot design and allowing the submission of other
proposals by alternate developers before making a final decision.
Sincerely,
James and Nancy Reed
5100 Oxford Avenue
Jackie Hoogenakker
From: jennifer arndt genaronj @usa.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 20016:49 PM
To: jhoogenakker @ci.edina.mn.us
Subject: Case File S -00 -5, subdivision on Interlachen
I am writing this note to express my disapproval of the proposed subdivision
at Oxford and Interlachen. Our neighborhood does not need more traffic. The
city of Edina should not make gross exceptions to the existing codes the rest
of us abide by.
I found it amusing that just this week I received the city of Edina's vision.
I see no way you can approve this proposed subdivision and commit to Edina's
vision at the same time.
Objective #1 of the vision states: Maintain strong residential neighborhood
and includes issues such as the "characteristics of Edina, architectural
housing styles, street patterns, extensive landscaping..." the subdivision will
not meet this goals. An additional issue raised is traffic. Four homes in
this area is sure to have an adverse impact on traffic in our neighborhood.
I encourage you to strongly reject this proposal. How can you approve it with
a clean conscience and still abide by the vision for Edina's future ?? Edina's
future will not be found by making exceptions to the rule!
A concerned neighbor
Jennifer L. Arndt
5041 Bedford Ave.
Get free email and a permanent address at http: / /www.amexmail.com / ?A =1
TO:
FROM:
VIA:
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
Mayor & City Council
Steve Grausam, Liquor Store Manager
Gordon Hughes, City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000
DATE: January 16, 2001
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Company
1. Falls Automotive (Hennepin Co. Contract #0543A0)
2.
3.
4.
5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE BID:
Falls Automotive
AGENDA ITEM IIIA
Amount of Quote or Bid
1. $ 15,756.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
$ 15,756.00
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This is a purchase for Edina Liquor Store operations. This is a % ton van to be used for transporting
product.from store to store. This purchase is funded through the Liquor Enterprise Funds.
M!Alinaiture
ti�.
The Recommended Bid is
within budget
4 -5401-e
Department
not within budget
m, rlf ldi iuC LJII CULVI
o e
TO:
FROM:
VIA:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
Mayor Maetzold and Members of the City Council
John Keprios, Director of Parks and Recreation
Gordon Hughes, City Manager
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000
January 8, 2001
AGENDA ITEM: III. B.
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Fairway Grassmower Braemar Golf Course
Company Amount of Quote or Bid
1. MTI Distributing Inc. 1. $17,311.58
2. 2.
3. 3.
4. 4.
5. 5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Account #: 5400.1740
MTI Distributing Inc., $17,311.58 (includes Sales Tax)
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This is for purchase of one GM345 Groundsmaster 72" Flex Deck Mower, deluxe seat, 2 post
rops, filter kit, rear weight and one arm rest kit. The mower is used to routinely cut
the fairway grounds of 27 championship holes, 9 executive holes and the driving range
at Braemar Golf Course. This is a State of Minnesota Contract Bid Contract #425965.
This will replace a 1992 Jacobsen Rotary mower, which will be sold at the auction.
Edina Park and Recreation
John K ,,hXos, Director Department
This Recommended bid i s X
within budget not within budget „ John WAI,4i, Finance Director
Gordon Hffig4, City Manager
r
xx .
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
Agenda Item W.A.
From: Vince Bongaarts
Consent
Traffic Safety Coordinator
Information Only ❑
Date: January 16, 2001
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
®
To Council
Subject: Traffic Safety Staff Review
of January 9, 2001
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Approve Traffic Safety Review of January 9, 2001.
TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW
TUESDAY, JANUARY 9, 2001.
The staff review of traffic safety matters occurred on January 9, 2001. Staff present
included the City Planner, Police Chief, City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, the
Traffic Safety Coordinator and the Public Works Traffic Control Specialist.
From that review, the below recommendations are provided. On each of the items,
persons involved have been contacted and the staff recommendation has been
discussed with them. They have also been informed that if they disagree with the
recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can be included on the
January 16, 2001, Council Agenda.
SECTION A:
Requests on which the staff recommends approval.
None for January 9, 2001
SECTION B:
Requests on which the staff recommends denial of request.
1. A request for `No Passing" signs along with double yellow stripping on West 66th
between Cornelia Drive and Westshore Drive.
The requestor feels. that when a car passes another car in that location it becomes
a dangerous situation due to the close proximity of pedestrians using the walkway
between the Lakes and the lack of space for a car to take evasive action if needed.
W. 66th Street between Westshore Drive and Cornelia Drive has a 35 mph speed
limit. There is a average daily traffic (ADT) of 5,800 vehicles.
There have been no accidents reported on W. 66th Street between Westshore Drive
and Cornelia Drive since 1/1/97.
No one on staff ever recalls seeing a car passing another car on W. 66th Street at
this location.
The staff feels there is no evidence to indicate a need for a no passing zone. on W.
66th Street and recommends denial of the request.
TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW
January 9, 2001
Page 2
2. A request for 'No Parking' restrictions on the east side of the bridge located south of
West 50th Street on Wooddale.
The requestor feels that the road gets too narrow when there are cars parked on
the bridge especially on Sunday during church services.
There presently are 'No Parking' restrictions on the west side of Wooddale that
include the bridge.
An administrator for St. Stephen's Episcopal Church stated that they have had no
complaints or problems with the parking on the bridge.
The width of Wooddale from W. 50th St. to the bridge is 36 feet. The roadway
portion width of the bridge is approximately 30 feet. Wooddale south of the bridge
is a normal 32 foot width. Staff feels the bridge is wide enough to accommodate
the present parking situation. There have been no reported accidents at this
location since 1991.
The staff recommends denial of the request for'No Parking' restrictions on the
bridge.
SECTION C:
Requests which are deferred to a later date or referred to others.
A request for some kind of `signing' advising traffic southbound on Halifax at the
West 50th Street intersection that traffic from the opposite direction may have a
green arrow allowing them to make left turns to westbound West 50th Street.
The requestor feels that the present situation,in regard to the green arrow can be
confusing to someone not familiar with the area.
The confusion occurs when a vehicle southbound on Halifax at the intersection of
west 50th Street has a red light and intends to make a right turn on red to go west
on West 50th Street when confronted by a vehicle making a left turn from
Northbound Halifax to also go west on West 50th Street. Unknown to the vehicle
southbound on Halifax with red light, the northbound vehicle has a green arrow
allowing the left turn to West 50th Street. When the traffic signals change to red for
the east/west traffic, the northbound Halifax traffic gets a green light and also a
green arrow enabling northbound traffic to make left turns to go west on West 50tH
Street. The traffic southbound on Halifax remains with a red light until the green
arrow for northbound traffic expires.
TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW
January 9, 2001
Page 3
There have been 11 reported accidents for the intersection from 111/97 to 12/31/99
but none related to the above situation.
The staff will be referring this to the Country Club area traffic project for further study
with no recommendations.
2. A request for the City to look at the traffic congestion on Gleason Road particularly
between Crosstown Highway 62 and Valley View Road. .
To understand what is happening on Gleason Road between Highway 62.and Valley
View Road we need to look at a bigger picture to see what is generating all
the traffic; where it is coming from and where it is going. The explosion of real
estate and industrial development to the west, along with a severe
underdevelopment of the metro highway system, is beginning to have
considerable repercussions on our local traffic systems. Traffic that 20 years ago
used the metro highway system is now using local streets for shorter metro trips
rather than the congested freeway system. Traffic surveys done on the west side
of Edina prior to and after the ramp meters were turned off show that there was
virtually no change in the traffic volumes. There was no large exodus back to the
freeway just because the ramp meters were turned off.
Gleason Road is a major collector running north and south between Vernon Avenue
on the north and West 78th Street on the south. Gleason runs parallel with Highway
169 to the west, and another collector, Tracy Avenue, to the east. There are no
other major collectors west of Hwy 100 and east of Hwy 169 that connect Vernon
Ave and points north to W. 78th St. and points south.. Gleason intersects with 3
major east/west collectors; Vernon Ave., Hwy 62, and W'78 th St., along with three
minor collectors; McCauley Trail, Valley View Road, and Dewey Hill
Road. All have some effect on Gleason Road.
The traffic on Gleason Road is generated by several sources. Probably causing the
biggest problem is the metro commuter work -force that includes Edina residents
along with other neighboring community residents coming and going to work
primarily between the hours of 7 -9 a.m. and 4 -6 p.m. However, in the last 10' years
there is also a large amount of traffic between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m.
Another traffic generator are the schools. Creek Valley Elementary, Edina High
School, and Valley View Middle School. Many parents are driving their children to
and from school because of latch key programs or other activities. Edina High'
School sells parking permits for it's fairly large parking. lots and has a waiting list.
TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW
January 9, 2001
Page 4
Regardless of the source there is significant traffic volume all along Gleason Road.
The ADT (average daily traffic) on Gleason Road per day is:
1) Vernon to Hwy 63 is 9300 vehicles
2) Hwy 62 to McCauley Trail is 7700 vehicles
3) McCauley Trail to Valley View Road is 5700 vehicles
4) Valley view Road to Dewe Hill Road is 2200 vehicles
5) Dewey Hill. Road to W. 78tX St. is 2100 vehicles
Those'Highways and collectors intersecting with Gleason have the following ADT's
(average daily traffic) per day:
1) Vernon Ave: (to east of Gleason) is 10,300 vehicles
2) Vernon Ave. (to west of Gleason) is 4,700 vehicles
3) Hwy 62 is 95,000 vehicles
4) Valley View road is 4,200 vehicles
5) Dewey Hill Road is 4,200 vehicles
6) W. 78 th Street is 14,400 vehicles
Presently the worst time for congestion'on Gleason Road is between 4 and 6 p.m.
This is the time Monday through Friday that we get the. heaviest concentration
of traffic on Gleason Road.
During this two hour period (4 -6 p.m.) there are approximately 1,100 vehicles on
Gleason at Creek Valley School; 600 vehicles southbound and 500
northbound. Southbound traffic has to stop at Creek Valley Road 'and Valley View
Road. On an average of 5 cars a minute, and, with similar traffic east/west on
Valley View road, you will have a back -up at those stop signs until the volume
decreases.
In this two hour period there is an average of 1,600 vehicles exiting onto Gleason
from the eastbound Hwy 62 ramp. This traffic goes north and south on Gleason.
There are an additional 360 vehicles exiting onto Gleason from McCauley Trail,
which, is very close to the eastbound Hwy 62 exit. This McCauley traffic originates
at Valley View Road and Hwy 169.
At approximately 5:15 p.m the back -up on McCauley Trail and the eastbound Hwy
62 ramp become 5 -10 minute waits to get onto Gleason due to heavy traffic
already on Gleason northbound and south bound. Most of this traffic want to go
north on Gleason. When the back -up gets bad some of the traffic wanting to go
north on Gleason make right turns and go south on Gleason to Creek Valley
TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW
January 9, 2001
Page 5
School entrances and make U -turns or turn around in the park and school parking
lots and head back north on Gleason.
For all this traffic there are very few accidents. From 1/1/97 to 12/31/99 there were
8 accidents. All the accidents were at different locations.
Traffic will probably get worse before it gets better. Highway 494 reconstruction
along with the reconstruction of Hwy 62/35W bottleneck won't help the situation.
MNDOT is very unlikely to install signal lights at the Hwy62 /Gleason interchange
in the near future. Also, signal lights would only pull more traffic into the area.
There is very little that can be done to alleviate the congestion Monday through
Friday 4 -6 p.m. on Gleason road between Hwy 62 and Valley View Road. This is
no different than Interlachen and Blake Rd., Tracy Ave. and Hwy 62, France Ave.
and Hwy 62, and several other locations.
The staff will continue to monitor this location. The staff has no recommendations
to make at this time
o e t4
Cn
s�2 O
REPORPRECOM MEN DATION
To: Mayor & City Council
Agenda Item
IV.B.
From: Debra Mangen
Consent
❑
City Clerk
Information Only
❑
Date: January 18, 2000
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
®
To Council
Subject: Big Bowl On -Sale
Intoxicating Liquor
Action
®
Motion
License — Corporate
Transfer of Ownership
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Motion approving an on -sale intoxicating liquor license and on -sale Sunday license to Big
Bowl, Inc. under the corporate ownership of Brinker Restaurant Corporate d.b.a. Big Bowl
Cafe beginning January 17, 2001 until March 31, 2001.
Info /Background:
Big Bowl, Inc. d.b.a. as Big Bowl Cafe at the Galleria was one of the original on -sale
intoxicating liquor licensees. Big Bowl was under corporate ownership of Lettuce Entertain
You Enterprises, LLC and Brinker International each with a 50% interest. Brinker
Restaurant Corporation is. now in the process of purchasing the 50% interest from Lettuce
Entertain You. Edina Code requires a new application be filed when any change of more
than 10% occurs in the corporate ownership of a liquor licensee. Appropriate applications
have been submitted with all applicable fees paid from Brinker International.
The Planning Department has reviewed the application and finds that it complies with code
requirements.
The Health Department is satisfied with the applicants' plan for storage and service.
The Police Department has completed their investigation and with no negative findings.
Attached is Chief Siitari's memo stating the findings of the background investigation.
The licenses are placed on the agenda for consideration by the Council.
interoffice
MEMORANDUM
to: Chief Michael Siitari
from: Sgt. Phil Larsen
subject: Liquor License Transfer — Big Bowl
date: January 11, 2001
Brinker International is a multinational corporation based in Dallas, TX, and operates over 1,000
restaurants with $2.2 billion in revenues in its last fiscal year. Brinker owns Chili's of MN, Romano's
Macaroni Grill, and is currently a 50% owner (the other 50% is held by Lettuce Entertain You of
Chicago, IL) of Big Bowl restaurant in the Galleria in Edina. Brinker is seeking to become the 100%
owner of Big Bowl and is expecting to become the sole owner on or about January 31; 2001.
Brinker International is seeking to obtain a full liquor license from the City of Edina. Brinker currently
holds an active liquor license for Romano's Macaroni Grill and for Big Bowl.
I have conducted an investigation, limited in scope by a four day deadline for completion, of the
license application and the applicants themselves with the following findings:
• There are no criminal records for any of four listed officeholders.
• There is no pending civil litigation in Hennepin County against Brinker International or any of
its' restaurants in Hennepin County. Two previous civil actions in 1994 and 1996 have been
resolved and appear to have been food related; no Dram Shop actions.
• The MN Departments of Public Safety (Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement) and Revenue have
no record of violations or pending actions against Brinker or any of its' Minnesota holdings.
• The MN Secretary of State certifies Big Bowl to be a corporation in good standing.
• Between Big Bowl and Romano's Macaroni Grill, there have been three gross misdemeanor
Furnishing Alcoholic Beverages to Person(s) Under 21 violations in 14 months. All fines have
been paid and a suspension served in those cases.
• Brinker International is not ineligible for licensure under City Code 900.08 or 900.09.
I recommend approval of Brinker International's application for liquor license.
C lJ L,
Sgt: Phil Larsen
Investigations
4,9�NA.1l�l�r
�1
ow e
Cn
Iaae
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor Maetzold and members of
the Edina City Council
From: John Keprios, Director
Park & Recreation Department
Date: January 9, 2001
Subject: Blue Ribbon Committee's
Final Report and Recommendations
Agenda Item IV. C.
Consent
Information Only
Mgr. Recommends
❑ To HRA
® To Council
❑ Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
® Discussion
The Blue Ribbon Committee is pleased to report that they have completed their mission
as commissioned by the City Council. I intend to provide the City Council an in -depth
power point presentation that outlines the process and summary of conclusions reached
by the Blue Ribbon Committee. The following Report and Recommendations document
was written by Jennifer Wilkinson, Communications Coordinator.
CITY OF EDINA
BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE
REPORT & RECOMMENDATIONS
Back round
Because of the size of the community's athletic programs, the City of Edina for.several
years has looked for ways to address a shortage of public gymnasiums and athletic fields.
Many of the City's existing fields and general park infrastructure, constructed as many as
35 years ago, have never been upgraded or improved. As a result, there is an additional
need for general park improvements.
In late 1999 and early 2000, the City and Edina Public Schools conducted a study to
determine the feasibility of constructing new recreational facilities and renovating others
for use by the entire community. It is believed by staff and the Blue Ribbon Committee
that it would be more effective and economical for the City and school district to work -
together to provide public facilities for the entire community to use.
TSP One, Inc., Architects and Engineers prepared a pre - design study to construct a new
fieldhouse at the Community Center, 5701 Normandale Road; improve existing
gymnasiums, gymnasium support space and theater in the Community Center; renovate
Kuhlman Field; improve the athletic fields at Edina High School; improve the
gymnasium at South View Middle School; renovate the swimming pools at Valley View
and South View middle schools; and construct an addition at Concord Elementary School
that would contain a gymnasium and storage space. The Park and Recreation Department
also identified many needs within the City's park system.
In the spring of 2000, Minneapolis -based Decision Resources conducted a telephone
survey in the City to determine if there was support for such a project. Although the
survey determined that there was general support for such a project, respondents' answers
showed a concern for "massing" at the Community Center site where Normandale French
Immersion Elementary School is located.
Although the Council considered a 2000 referendum for the proposed projects, members
decided it would be best to commission a committee to study the issue further. In late
May, the Blue Ribbon Committee was commissioned and charged with answering the
following:
• What is the need for additional gymnasiums, soccer fields and auditoriums in the
City?
• What other needs should be addressed?
• Is there an opportunity to work with Edina Public Schools to meet the City's
recreational needs? If so, how should such an arrangement be structured?
• Are there other partnerships that should be made to provide recreational facilities?
• Is it appropriate for some or all of the facilities to be located on school district
property?
• Will the recommended package of facilities and improvements be acceptable to the
community?
After the Council appointed members, the committee began meeting in September. The
group met biweekly initially, but found a need to meet weekly soon after to meet a year-
end deadline imposed by the Council. Park and Recreation Director John Keprios and
Assistant Park and Recreation Director Ed MacHolda served as staff liaisons to the
committee. School district personnel, including Superintendent Ken Dragseth, assisted as
needed. Committee members were Chairman Bob Christianson, Jeff Bohlig, Mary
Brindle, Ted Brinkman, Kris Hayes, Doug Johnson, Chuck Mooty, Linda Presthus, Dan
Rectenwald, Ann Swenson and Jim Van Valkenburg. Members represent various
community groups including the Edina Park Board, Planning Commission, Normandale
French Immersion Elementary School, athletic boosters, the senior community and the
neighborhood around the Community Center.
2
Information - Gathering Process
Recent research by City staff has shown a need for additional gymnasiums, athletic fields
and neighborhood park improvements. A need has also been documented for
improvements to auditoriums in the community. The Blue Ribbon Committee reviewed
those studies and surveys that demonstrate the needs.
Edina Public Schools Superintendent Ken Dragseth appeared before the committee,
discussing the school district's facility needs, which include classroom space, performing
arts facilities, athletic fields and parking and renovations to the stadium, swimming pools
and gymnasiums.
The committee toured outdoor athletic fields in the community, including those at
Braemar, Cornelia School, Countryside, Garden, Heights, Highlands, Lewis, McGuire,
Pamela, Rosland, Todd, Weber and Wooddale parks, Concord Elementary School, Edina
High School and the Edina Community Center:
After hearing from City and school district staff and then seeing current. facilities
firsthand, the committee then heard from the City's many youth athletic associations to
determine their needs. Over the course of three meetings, the committee met with Jr.
Olympic Volleyball; Edina Basketball Association (in- house); Edina Basketball
Association (traveling); Edina Girls Athletic Association (basketball, volleyball, flag
football and team tennis); Edina Girls Traveling Basketball Association; Youth Club
Field Sports (rugby and lacrosse); Edina Soccer Association (in- house); Edina Soccer
Club (traveling program); Edina Football Association; Edina Baseball Association; Edina
Youth Softball Association; Edina Girls Fastpitch Softball Association; Adult Field
Sports (soccer and softball); Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club; Braemar Arena;
Edina Swim Club; Edina Athletic Department; Edina Athletic Boosters Club; and the
Edina Art Center.
The Committee employed the services of TSP One for the purpose of:
1. Analyzing alternative locations for gymnasiums.
2. Providing construction cost estimates for other recommended improvements.
3. Providing operational cost-estimates for new gyms, pool, and recommended bubble.
Among the gymnasium alternatives considered was a fieldhouse at Braemar Park.
Projects on Edina Public Schools Property
Kuhlman Field. The Committee recommends a $7.081 million renovation of Kuhlman
Field, which includes adding artificial turf and purchase of a bubble. The proposed
stadium project includes a new 5,000 -seat home bleacher, 1,500 -seat visitor bleacher,
press box, new home entrance plaza and gate element at west entrance, new visitor gate at
northeast corner, new pavement between storage /concession building and running track,
new pavement under visitor bleacher for outdoor storage, relocation of existing
concessions building on visitor side, locate satellites on visitor side, reconstruction and
widening of track to eight lanes with relocation of field events, one 70 -by -300 square foot
and two 40 -by -100 square foot storage buildings under the home bleachers, one 40 -by -80
square foot unheated concessions building with toilets, improve and upgrade lighting,
improve drainage, artificial turf for a multi - purpose athletic field (football, soccer,
lacrosse, rugby etc.), bubble structure, and landscaping.
The Committee asked staff to determine the possibility of erecting the bubble at the
Braemar site or on the lower -level .soccer fields at Edina High School. The Edina Fire
Department determined that a bubble is not possible at Braemar because access does not
meet the Fire Code. (There would not be enough room for fire trucks to turn around and
maneuver.) The soccer fields at Edina High School are not in the flood plain as other
playing fields are, but they are within the 100 -year flood marker. Artificial turf, which is
needed for a bubble, would be significantly damaged if the fields ever flooded. At least
one Committee member could remember seeing water standing on the fields in recent
years. A suggestion was made to bubble the Middle Field — the field between the
Community Center and South View Middle School. However, Committee members
expressed concern with access, limited parking and the close proximity to the school and
neighborhood.
Because another suitable location could not be found, the Committee determined the best
place for the bubble would be Kuhlman Field. In addition, it would be less expensive to
build the bubble' at Kuhlman because fencing and storage, among other things, are
already in place: However, the Committee recommends that the bubble entrance be
designed to.minimize a potential adverse traffic affect on the i neighborhood surrounding
the Community Center.
The school district supports the concept of the bubble if it is financially self - supporting.
Edina Community Center Campus Improvements. The Committee recommends $1.334
million in improvements to the Edina Community Center campus including expansion of
the middle parking lot, new pedestrian access pathway from the lower /east to upper /west
campus and artificial turf at Middle Field.
Natural turf on the current field cannot withstand playing time by both school athletics
and community athletics. The Committee recommends artificial turf on Middle Field in
addition to Kuhlman Field to provide another playing field for City- sponsored activities.
Additional parking and pedestrian pathways would complement other proposed projects
at the Community Center.
Edina High School Campus Improvements. The Committee recommends $2.611 million
in improvements at the Edina High School campus including a 300 -by -280 square foot
baseball field, a 220 -by -220 square foot softball field, a 200 -by -200 square foot softball
field, two 360 -by -160 square foot soccer fields on the lower level, two 360 -by -160 soccer
fields on the upper level and renovation of the main high school soccer field.
Committee members emphasized that the lower level soccer fields must be created with
the best natural turf possible and suggested staff further consult with the architects.
The plan includes the installation of softball field lighting. The Committee prefers
lighting the fields at Pamela Park rather than those at Edina High School. Lighting at
Pamela Park is preferred because there are more fields there. Members expressed a
concern that athletic fields need to be renovated to ensure that they are safe, durable, and
able to weather floods. Members.also pointed out that mosquitoes might be a problem if
the high school fields are lit. If for some reason the Council chooses not to install lighting
at Pamela Park, the Committee recommends lighting the high school fields. Lighting
Pamela Park would cost approximately $160,000.
Gymnasiums. After meeting with the, athletic associations, the Committee
determined that there is a need for at least four additional gymnasiums in the City. The
school district prefers two new gyms at Valley View Middle School, one gym at Concord
Elementary School and one gym at South View..
The Committee seriously discussed the possibility of building a four -gym fieldhouse at
Braemar, but ultimately decided against it because of the high construction costs. Some
Committee members said they felt the new gyms would be most utilized if they were
attached to schools. (The gyms would be used during the day by students and during the
evening by the community.) The Committee, therefore, recommends building two gyms
at Valley View, one at Concord and one at South View. However; if Braemar is not used
as the site for a southwest metro training center for,public safety officials, the Committee
recommends that it should be used for some recreational purpose.
In addition, the Committee recommends improving the two existing gyms at the Edina
Community Center and the adjoining lobby and concessions area and a gym at South
View.
The total project cost for the new and renovated gyms is estimated to be $8,120,600.
Swimming pools. The Committee recommends a new $4.123 million 25 -meter swimming
pool at Valley View Middle Schools with $1.503 million in new locker rooms and
$150,000 concessions stand for the pool and gym complex and a $451,000 renovation of
the existing pool at South View Middle School.
The Committee also studied a proposal for a 50 -meter pool. The Edina' Swim Club
expressed a strong interest in constructing an indoor 50 -meter competition pool. It was
determined that an indoor 50 -meter pool would definitely, be used by the community for
competitive swimming, swim lessons, aerobic swim classes, and public lap swimming,
however, Committee members were concerned with'the projected operating costs of a 50-
meter pool. The Committee determined that a 25 meter by 25 -yard competition pool with
an L -shape deep end diving -well with a removable bulk head was more than adequate to
meet the identified needs.
Black Box Theater, auditorium and lobby. The Committee recommends a $1.385 million
renovation of the Edina Community Center auditorium and lobby and $1.6 million
addition of a Black Box Theater at Edina High School.
During Decision Resources' survey, it was found that there is large. support for a
community theater. The Committee determined that the Edina Community Center
auditorium and .lobby should be renovated. The theater should have proper lockdown
security and at least 630 seats 'to accommodate Normandale French Immersion School's
school population. Although the public will not be able to access the school from the
theater or lobby, the Committee recommends that Normandale have direct access to the
theater from inside the school.
5
The Committee determined that the Community Center auditorium will not meet all of
the community's performing arts needs. As a result, the Committee also recommends a
"Black Box Theater" be built at Edina High School. A Black Box Theater is a smaller,
more intimate theater in which seating can be set up for. an audience as small as 10 or 20
and'then rearranged for an audience of up to 300.
A dance theater was also proposed for Edina High School,' but the Committee does not
recommend building such a facility. However, some Committee members stated that .
dance and related activities could be scheduled in a wood floor gymnasium. The middle
gym at Valley View Middle School was specifically suggested as a dance activities site
due to its small size.
Pro-jects in '01y Parks
Most equipment and fields in the City's parks have not been replaced, upgraded or
renovated since they were constructed in the 1960s and 70s. Nearly all park projects
recommended by the Committee are such projects.
ADA- compliant access paths to playground equipment. The Committee recommends
$84,000 in ADA- compliant access paths to equipment in Arden, Birchcrest, Braemar,
Countryside, Garden, Highlands, Strachauer, Tingdale, Todd, Walnut Ridge, Weber and
Wooddale parks., Each path will cost approximately $7,000 to construct.
Playground equipment replacement. The Committee recommends $765,000 in
playground equipment replacement. Parks to receive equipment include Alden
($100,000), Heights ($100,000), Kojetin ($100,000), McGuire ($100,000), Normandale
($115,000), Pamela ($150,000) and Sherwood ($100,000).
Ball field and grounds irrigation. The Committee recommends $375,000 in ball field and
grounds irrigation. Such projects include Braemar soccer field ($15,000), Cornelia School
little league field ($15,000), Cornelia School youth and adult softball fields ($40,000),
Countryside west baseball field ($10,000), Courtney Ball Fields — Braemar field No. 4
($15,000), Highlands soccer and softball fields ($50,000), Rosland baseball field
($20,000), three Lewis soccer fields ($60,000), Pamela senior and junior soccer field's
($40,000), Todd ($15,000), Tupa ($20,000), Weber softball and baseball fields ($60,000)
and Wooddale ($15,000)
Ball fields (new or renovated). The Committee recommends $1.589 million in new or
renovated ball fields. Such projects'include one new soccer field at Creek Valley
($54,000), renovation of Braemar soccer field ($180,000), renovation of Cornelia School
little league field, youth softball and adult softball fields ($140,000), renovation of
Courtney Ball Fields — Braemar field No. 4 ($100,000), renovation of Highlands senior
soccer field ($180,000), renovation of Lewis east, west and central soccer fields
($540,000), renovation of Pamela senior soccer field ($180,000), reorientation of Rosland
baseball field ($30,000), renovation of Todd softball field ($30,000), renovation of Weber
baseball and softball fields ($95,000) and renovation of Wooddale baseball field
($60,000).
Fencing. The Committee recommends $496,000 in fencing projects. Such projects
include Bredeson perimeter fencing ($150,000), Cornelia School little league, youth and
0
adult softball fields ($140,000), Countryside west baseball field ($40,000), Courtney Ball
Fields — Braemar field No. 4 ($40,000), Rosland playground and picnic area and baseball
field ($80,000), Weber baseball and softball fields ($40,000) and Wooddale softball field
($6,000).
Shade covers for dugouts. The Committee recommends $6,000 in shade covers for
dugouts. Each shade cover costs an estimated $400. Dugouts would be built at Cornelia
School (3), Rosland, Normandale, Weber (2), Countryside, Garden (2), Highlands,
Pamela (3), and Todd parks.
Keyless entry system. The Committee recommends $59,000 be spent for a keyless entry
system at Arden, Arneson, Braemar, Bredeson, Countryside, Creek Valley, Highlands,
Normandale, Pamela, Utley and Van Valkenburg parks. With the exception of Arneson
and Van Valkenburg parks, each keyless entry system will cost $5,000. It will cost
approximately $7,000 for keyless entry systems at the other parks.
Roof replacement. The Committee recommends $14,000 be spent for roof replacement at
the Arneson Acres Park building and museum ($8,000) and the Bredeson Park "comfort
station" ($6,000).
Arneson Acres Park building. Besides the $8,000 for roof replacement, the Committee
recommends $32,000 be spent there for steel siding and new windows. It is believed the
siding and windows will make the building more efficient.
Completion of Van Valkenburg Park. The Committee recommends $305,000 for the
completion of Van Valkenburg Park. The project will include grading and landscaping
and the addition of a hard surface court, a pathway, playground equipment, miscellaneous
park equipment and three batting cages.
Pathway repairs /additions. The Committee recommends $265,000 in pathway repairs or.
additions at Arneson, Cornelia School, Rosland and Walnut Ridge parks.
Parking lot repairs /additions. The Committee recommends $650,000 in parking lot
repairs or additions at Arneson, Rosland and Weber parks.
The Committee denied a request from Park and Recreation Department staff for an
improved entrance and identification sign for Arneson Park. Some Committee members
said the new entrance with curb would be too costly to maintain.
Baseball dugouts. The Committee recommends $80,000 in new baseball dugouts at
Countryside Park and Courtney Ball Fields — Braemar field No. 4.
Edina Art Center. The Committee recommends $466,000 in improvements at the Edina
Art Center, including expansion of the pottery room, expansion of the Clark gift shop and
addition of a fire suppression system.
Braemar Arena. The Committee recommends $450,000 in improvements at Braemar
Arena, including relocation of the ice - resurfacing room, upgrade of the heating and
dehumidification system in the east arena and addition of a fire suppression system.
Edina Aquatic Center: The Committee recommends $1,500,000 in improvements at the
Edina Aquatic Center, including replacing the worn water slide with two new water slides
in a separate plunge pool, replace a one meter diving board with a cable ride, raise the
depth of the lap pool to five feet, provide 4 new large umbrellas, 470 feet of new 8'
perimeter fencing, equipment room expansion, landscaping improvements, add two new
deck showers and expand deck space, add a sand play area with ramp access and shower
control.
Miscellaneous items. The Committee also recommended several individual items,
including:
• Replace Snowmobile, $100,000
• Registration/scheduling software for Park and Recreation Department, $50,000
• Fire protection system at Tupa Park where the Grange Hall and Cahill School (both
on the National Register of Historic Places) are located, $50,000
• Replace concessions building at Courtney Fields, $800,000
• Renovate picnic shelter and pump house building at Sherwood Park, $40,000
• Replace maintenance garage at Courtney Fields, $30,000
• Lift station for sanitary sewer at Arneson Park for the greenhouse, $35,000
• Indoor furnishings including tables, chairs, computers and a sound system for the new
Senior'Center, scheduled to be complete in 2002, $225,000
• Development of an indoor skate park at the YMCA (a collaborative of the YMCA and
the Cities of Edina, Bloomington and Richfield), $80,000
• Rebuild tennis courts at Walnut Ridge Park, $50,000
• General skating rink upgrade at Normandale Park, $8,000
The Committee denied a request for the addition of Edina High School varsity hockey
locker rooms at Braemar Arena. Some Committee members said they saw the project as
being beneficial to the school, but not the community at- large.
Conclusion
The Committee recommends the City Council proceed with a 2001 referendum for
$37,121,600 in park and recreation facility improvements. The Blue Ribbon Committee
recognizes that there are several projects that still need further study with regard to their
projected construction costs. The Committee recommends that all of the proposed
projects be included in a referendum.
The attached schedules summarize the costs of the recommended improvements.
Also attached is a schedule of the projects listed in priority, No. 1 being the highest
priority project.
The Blue Ribbon Committee has offered its services to the City Council if the Council
chooses to alter the recommended projects (add or delete). The Committee is willing to
review those alterations and make further recommendations if the Council so desires.
January 11, 2001
children grow
Dear Edina City Council Members,
6401 Gleason Road Edina, NIN 55439
(952) 848 -3200
Fax: (952) 848 -3201
As members of Creek Valley Elementary School's Site Council, we would
like to urge you to support the referendum projects that are being proposed
as a joint venture between the school district and the community. We feel
that the soccer field that is to be built adjacent to our school would not only
benefit Creek Valley students, but would be a wonderful asset for the
residents of our city as well. We are privileged to live and work in a
community that takes pride in the high standard of living it provides.
Thank you for your consideration!
Sincerely,
Kari Dahlquist, interim principal
Gary davidson, teacher
Mary Jane Houlihan, teacher
au /&L &ee rf parent
am
Pitt--, ca-,z::C Cavert, teacher
L
Malinda Fennell, teacher
&41AA-,
Barb Kotzer
teach
Tari Sherry, parent
ib
v
O gy.ACCREDITED
col
t 0
�� `SAC 10 \ p�
Independent School District 4 27313 Edina, Nfinnesov,
5845 Brookview Avenue
Edina, MN 55424
January 11, 2001
Dear Mayor Dennis Maetzold:
Wearing the hat of an Edina resident, parent, and administrator in the Edina Public Schools,
I would like to share some thoughts with you regarding the recommendations coming from the
Blue Ribbon Committee. Last spring, I attended your public hearing examining the need for
expanded facilities, but due to the large number of individuals present, I was not afforded the
opportunity to speak. I greatly appreciate the research the committee has done over the last
several months and would like to express my thoughts to you in this letter.
One of the reasons I moved to this community was the fact that Edina had quality Park and
Recreation programs. Living adjacent to Pamela Park, I have witnessed the increased use of this
particular park over the last decade. I know that expanded facilities are needed throughout the city
to keep pace with the increasing numbers of young people involved in our programs. In addition,
I have seen our own residents, my neighbors, utilize facilities in neighboring communities, such
as Eden Prairie, because of greater availability and better quality of those facilities. That is most
unfortunate!
Another perspective I want to share is as a result of my six years of work at Valley View Middle
School. I served the first three years assistant principal and the last three years as principal. As a
school administrator, one of my roles is to assist in the managing and scheduling of the pool,
fields, and gymnasium facilities for school related and community activities. I often have to turn
down requests for swimming, basketball, and volleyball, for example, because the existing pool
and gym space is already booked. Also, you should know, I regularly authorize building permits
to use Valley View's pool as early as 5:00 a.m. on school days and weekends. This seems an
unreasonable hour for individuals to be using the pool, yet they are eager, willing and requesting
to do so, because no other available pool time exists for them. A new 25 meter pool will allow
the possibility of diving.and swimming simultaneously and increase the availability of the pool
facility to many children and adults.
It is critical for our community to improve and expand pool, gymnasiums, and fields. I know you
have seen the results of both the Minnesota Health Survey and the Search Institute Survey. As
residents, we can help build needed assets for Edina's youth if we can continue to attract and
involve young people in healthy activities in and out of school such as swimming, soccer,
softball, baseball, and basketball. Give Edina taxpayers the opportunity to "step up to the plate"
for Edina kids by allowing us the chance to vote "yes" to a referendum this spring.
Sincere y,
✓ "V
L. Ann Sullivan
Taxpayer, Resident, Parent
Principal of Valley View Middle School
CC: Jim Hovland
Mike Kelly
Linda Masica
Scot Housh
15 January, 2001
Edina City Council
City Hall
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear City Council Members,
We are very concerned about the proposal to build a domed/bubble facility
at the Kulhman Field site.
Not only would this be visually undesirable to the neighborhood, but the
safety, traffic and parking problems would be continuous seven days and
nights a week until 11PM. No one should have their home subjected to
these conditions.
We strongly urge the Braemar area be considered for a domed/ bubble
facility, which in the long term would be to the best interest of the
community.
Sincerely,
'James and Virginia Lerson
4721 School Rd.
Edina, MN 55424
3i ti -
YA-66i
4,zk-I
January 16, 2001
TO: Mayor Dennis Maetzold
Edina City Hall
Dear Mayor Maetzold:.
I am writing to you to express my strong support in investing in our
community. We need to improve, update, and add gymnasiums, playing
fields, auditoriums, pool(s) and school buildings in Edina. I am willing. to
have my taxes increased to cover these costs.
I feel as if we've been talking for a very long time about improving our
facilities; please act soon so that we all can enjoy them.
Thank you!
��Zl
Ann Sheely
5905 Grove Street
Edina 55436
952- 922 -4867
E ®IN^ SENIOR HICIH SCH-QC).fl_
6754 VALLEY VIEW FiOAf>
E L I NA,
MN 55439 -1 701
952- 848 -3800
FAX 952 - 848 -3801
January 16, 2001
Mr. Gordon Hughes
City Manager
City of Edina
4801 West 5& Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Hughes,
We. are writing as parent members of the Edina High School Parent- Teacher- Student Organization and
the Site Council. The purpose of this letter is to speak:in,support of the proposed referendum'projects
that will be'brought forth by the Blue Ribbon Committee to the Edina City. Council on January 16, 2001.
Today, we met briefly with Edina High School principal, Dr. Chace Anderson, and he apprised us of the
impending projects. We were able to review a document that outlined the proposed projects submitted
by the Blue Ribbon Committee. It is our understanding that this proposal outlines major improvement
initiatives for city parks and athletic fields. In addition, it appears as though many essential upgrades
and general repair and maintenance needs of city parks and facilities will be addressed in this project.
Furthermore, it was explained to us that the referendum proposal includes the construction of a new
swimming pool and two new gymnasiums at Valley View Middle School and a Black Box Theater at
Edina High School. Each of these projects would have direct or indirect impact on the students of Edina
High School.
During PTSO and Site Council meetings this year, Dr. Anderson explained to us some of the Edina
Public Schools construction projects that may happen cooperatively, with the proposed city referendum.
Dr. Anderson was able to demonstrate the positive impact of the proposed city and.school district
changes upon the general classroom space at Edina High School. The projects will significantly imp_ act
in a positive way the quality of programs and classroom spaces at Edina High School.
In summary, we are writing to endorse the proposed projects brought forth by the Blue Ribbon
Committee while understanding that additional review and research is necessary in some cases. Many
benefits to the City of Edina, Edina Public Schools, and most importantly to the young people of Edina
are likely'to be realized upon completion,of these projects.
Sincerely,
Jean Colwell Sally areau . Sharon Bair Cmd derson � y An . ,aura Eaton Bonnie Guars
C: City Council Members
AN EC�UAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYEFZ
�p
•_ ; s
I�
E G�
E
i 0
e-
Gt-�
�2 -t,{�" „c,c� EE- �D 7�d-�- ��i•��GC., G�it�azc�P� /n�
Gt22
a � G��Q.- rf
CIS -F�- /NSA -� Gt Co%.'L° l�l� O-� /iz24n.Q
ECG
iU- 0-�•1� ,2Gtifi�'L- Gt.a /�7GLQ�at�J — C��'tk� U GL
M
4t
.3
WFUNFAM
U
U �w�
GIs c�a-- e,ct�L��al�
coc�4.�onl bc�'`i- dc�.t -�c�� lc�re.r, c� d�4he�
UCAJ
U
- -- Original Message---- -
From: Harold & Lila Larson [SMTP:hlarson @uswest.net]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 1:48 PM
To: Edina City Hall
Subject: Letter
Dear Edina City Council member,
The School Rd. Larsons encourage you to vote against putting a dome on
Kuhlman Field. We will vote for the referendum if this facility is put
on another location. Thanks for your attention to this long over due
city need. Harold and Lila Larson
v ► i v
ELEMENTARY FRENCH IMMERSION SCHOOL
January 11, 2001
Edina City Council
Edina City Hall
4801 50" Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear City Council Members:
5701 Normandole Road
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Telephone: 952.848.4100
Fax: 952.848.4101
The purpose of this letter is to express our support for the proposed remodeling of the auditorium in the
Edina Community Center. Improvements to the auditorium and the construction of a new lobby would be a
wonderful addition to the ECC and would benefit both the Normandale Elementary Community and the
entire Edina Community.
It is our hope that the Edina City Council will include the auditorium remodeling in the 2001 referendum. .
We look forward to working with you on this project.
Sincerely,
Normandale Elementary School Site Council
John Heer Dr. Harold Benson
Chair Principal
Cc: Dr. Ken Dragseth
Dr. David Vick
Jay Willemssen
Doug Johnson
Committed to the finest in Public School Education Today for the World of Tomorrow
January 11, 2001
IN [ -
r
children grow
Dear Edina City Council Members,
6401 Gleason Road Edina, MN 55439
(952) 848 -3200
Fax: (952) 848 -3201
As members of Creek Valley Elementary School's Site Council, we would
like to urge you to support the referendum projects that are being proposed
as a joint venture between the school district and the community.. We feel
that the soccer field that is to be built adjacent to our school would not only
benefit Creek Valley students, but would be a wonderful asset for the
residents of our city as well. We are privileged to live and work in a
community that takes pride in the high standard of living it provides.
Thank you for your consideration!
Sincerely,
6-,�Lo ` ��,
Kari Dahlquist, interim principal
Gary Davidson, teacher
Mary Jane Houlihan, teacher
MWau &LUeZerfparent
k;F
�%
�J.
4 �?
�Sf o
-9S1 1�1
✓qN I
1y_R16 F/ f 0ol
�CO
Beth Cavert, teacher
��rl /�i� -�l/Y ► e
Malinda Fennell, teacher
Barb Kotzer,_ teach
L11/-
f3e&y-- Karchand, KIDS!.' Club
r
Tari Sherry, parent
Independent School District # 273 Edina, lvfinnesc:a..
ACCREDITEDr
Z. SO C 1 A- \ -
2/15/01
Dear Edina City Council,
Please consider this support for the recommendations of the "Blue Ribbon"
committee in regard to necessary improvements to city athletic facilities,
specifically athletic field improvements, increased gymnasium space and
improved indoor pool facilities at both Valley View and South View middle
schools. These improvements will benefit students, children of all ages and
adults throughout the community, and are in line with the mission, vision and
objectives as outlined in your Executive Summary of Edina's Vision 20/20, and
our community's asset initiatives. We look forward to continued city commitment
to "partnering" with our schools, a definite "win -win" for all of us!
Thank you for your time and support, and continued efforts on behalf of our kids.
Sincerely,
VJnn.s � 6) /a-4
Valley View Middle School PTSO
(per secretary Marde Olson)
2/15/01
Dear Edina City Council,
Please consider this support for the recommendations of the "Blue Ribbon"
committee in regard to necessary improvements to city athletic facilities,
specifically athletic field improvements, increased gymnasium space and
improved indoor pool facilities at both Valley View and South View middle
schools. The proposed partnership of school and city allows much - needed
improvements and makes economic sense. As adults who grew up here, we
appreciate the facilities we enjoyed as youth that allowed us to participate in
sports and activities available. Now with children participating in multiple sports
throughout the year, we appreciate the commitment to continuing to expand and
improve those facilities to meet the increased participation of our youth today.
These improvements will benefit students, children of all ages and adults
throughout the community, and are in line with the mission, vision and objectives
as outlined in your Executive Summary of Edina's Vision 20/20, and our
community's asset initiatives.
Thank you for your time and support, and continued efforts on behalf of our kids.
Sincerely,
Marde and Mark Olson
5717 Londonderry Road
Edina MN 55436
January 11, 2000
I. I I M 1. N T A R 'i S C N 0 0 1
Dear City Council,
We are excited about the proposed joint venture between the City of Edina and our
school district to expand the space at Concord Elementary. As a staff, we see many
opportunities for our students to benefit from the much needed classroom areas and safe
gym space proposed in this venture. We also realize the need it will fulfill after school
for all of the programs offered to the community.
With the joint venture, we get the added classroom space we so desperately need for our
growing school. In addition, we see other wonderful things happening with the space to
be added under the new gym, such as:
• Having adequate space for resource programs such as special education
• Having options for team rooms to have a break -out space
• Creating enough storage for teachers, students, janitorial staff and KIDS Club
• Keeping Kindergarten KIDS Club on -site
• Creating bathrooms close to the cafeteria
Over the past several years, we have been adjusting to the tightening space at our school
and look with great anticipation to the future options this new space would provide, such
as:
• Holding physical education in a large, safe space
• Having adequate storage for P.E., KIDS Club and staff
• Being able to host more community after- school programs that directly benefit
our students
We want you to know that as members of Concord's staff and community, we are in full
support of the addition and are counting on your support. We welcome your questions
pertaining to this project and look foreword to working with you on this venture.
Thank you,
Concord Staff
5900 i C3^ (:(.)1:1 ) A',, I'INit IF 1.1 )1N. \, N'11NN1.N(_) I:\ 55-i24 / PF-IONI. / 952 h•4 .- <i_im) / FAN / 952- 848 - i301
I�.,I;;i.i !'!;I,G� �rl:�.��,1. an c,ltidl nl�lntn;utin� Cn;l�iucc[
January 14, 2001
To the Members of the Edina City Council,
After reviewing the Blue Ribbon Committee Report and Recommendations, we once
again would like to communicate how supportive we are of the proposed possibility of
the City and School District working together. We are particularly excited about the
potential for Concord Elementary School students to have access to a new gymnasium
and the additional classroom space that the School District would then be able to provide.
Concord continues to deal with its on -going space issues and continues to be the tightest
facility in the district given that:
• It is two classrooms short (without using a team room approach);
• we are using the cafeteria space for primary grade gym space;
• there is a shortage of rooms for special programs and office space
(including writing, Kid's Club offices, video studio and Special
Education); and
• it will be the only school next year with off -site Kindergarten Kids Club if
we realize the 2001 -2002 enrollment estimate.
We welcome the opportunity to talk with you about how we, in conjunction with
Principal Katie Williams, plan to effectively use the additional space. We feel it will
have a tremendously positive impact on the learning and development of our Concord
students. As concerned parents, and residents of Edina, we hope you will move forward
with the Committee's recommendations. We understand that this is a preliminary report
and that there will undoubtedly be revisions and refinements. Please know that we are
supportive of the proposal in general, as it is filled with wonderful additions and
improvements that will only benefit the community. Our organizations would also be
willing to help get the word out and communicate the benefits of this program.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
The Concord Site Council and
The Concord PTO Board
Dennis Maetzold, Mayor
City of Edina
4801 W. 50`' St.
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Dennis,
January 16, 2001
This is a note to express my concern for the lack of adequate space at Valley View
Middle School for extra curricular activities. I know there is a proposal on the docket for
tonight's meeting for pool and gymnasium additions. I would encourage you and the
council to seriously consider the expansion of our school in this area for the good of the
community, as well as the students here at Valley View and the high school.
I am an Edina resident and a P year teacher at Valley View. Our two girls went to
Valley View from 1991 to 1997 and had a wonderful experience. Space wasn't an issue
at that time, but it certainly is now. I am appalled that students and teachers now use
areas to teach that, in 1997, were closets. The physical education department uses the
lunchroom and hallways for classes. I teach drama and have tried to utilize the
lunchroom for my classes, only to be informed that the PE department needs to be in
there. I believe the areas added by tonight's proposal will also open up possibilities for
added classroom space down the road — also a very much - needed commodity.
We all know our children deserve the best and the Edina reputation has been to provide
it. Let's keep up that tradition!!!!
I encourage you and your board members to "Vote YES" for any expansion to the Valley
View/ High School learning facility. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Deborah K. Beltrand
CC:
Scot Housh
Jim Hovland
Mike Kelly
Linda Masica
Bert Tedder
6709 Cheyenne Trail
Edina, Minnesota 55439
Fax (952) 942 -8798
Home Phone (952) 941 -9083
Email Isledder @aol.com
January 16, 2001
Edina City Council
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Bear Council Members,
I am writing in support of the proposed construction and improvements to Edina Park, Recreation and
Education facilities. I am most in support of the needed Educational facilities.
Our schools, especially the Valley View Middle School Facility, is grossly overcrowded and in need of
additional space. The proposed new pool is a necessity to a nearly obsolete and inadequate current
facility. I commend your working with the Edina Public Schools in facilitating these plans which will
provide a savings to the community and maximum space utilization.
I am also in support of additional park and recreation facilities. My hope is that this will help provide
opportunities for our youth, especially our teens, providing them with local opportunities in recreational
sports.
Sincerely,
&-jc�aj
Bert Ledder, Site Council Member
Valley View Middle School
cc: Edina School Board
The 3pu-rt
Sout h w Middle School
Trevor R. Johnson, Interim Principal
Edina South View Middle School
4725 South View Lane
Edina, MN 55425
January 12, 2001
Dear Mayor Maetzold, '
4725 South View Lane
Edina, Minnesota 55424
(952) 848 -3700
FAX (952) 848 -3701
I wish to- convey support for the proposed City of Edina referendum which is currently
receiving the Edina City Council's consideration.
The proposal from the Blue Ribbon Committee recommends the construction of a new
gym on the South View site along with renovations to the swimming pool, and our two
current gym facilities. We are happy to say that this facility is beehive of activity during
the day and into the evenings. Our physical education programs keep these facilities in
nearly constant use. In addition, the community has been welcomed to the use of these
athletic and other classroom facilities when the school day ends. The doors to South
View are often open until 9:00 or 10:00 PM. It is gratifying to see this public facility used
to the idyllic extent that it was designed for:
Yet this building was constructed in 1956 and it has its shortcomings. The two gyms are
not full size. In particular, our eighth or ninth grade students, weekend community
tournaments, and the adults who use these facilities often feel cramped. These three
athletic facilities limit us to schedule no more than three different phy ed classes at one
time. Community basketball, volleyball, and swimming leagues are limited by these
factors as well. In addition, the wear and tear of 45 years of use is showing. Our ability to
meet the needs of Edina's children during day, and the community in the
evenings /weekends are reflected in the status of this school as a facility. The construction
of the new gym and renovations that could come from the proposed city referendum
would address this.
On the behalf of the South View staff, we pledge our support for the proposed city
referendum and the construction of the items detailed in the Blue Ribbon Committee's
recommendations. These new facilities would certainly be used with great enthusiasm
and frequency. Thank you for your time, efforts, and consideration.
Sincerely,
C�- d*-
Trevor R. Johnson
Mr. Thomas M. Sullivan
Chair, Southview Site Council
4512 Hibiscus Ave.
Edina, MN. 55435
January 15, 2001
Dear Mr. Maetzold,
I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere support for the proposed City of Edina
referendum. I am a life long resident of Edina and grew up enjoying some of the best facilities available to
a student/athlete. I am currently serving as the chair of the South View Middle School Site Council. This
position has afforded me with the opportunity to get reacquainted with a school I attended some 25 years
ago. Also, it should be noted that I am the father of four children aged 4 -12 who are now looking forward
to their development in our community. It is with these experiences that I wish to comment on the need to
upgrade facilities in Edina.
Undoubtedly you have heard from various school sources that the gyms and pool at South View'are past
their prime in terms of repair and usefulness. Therefore; rather than offer another testimonial from a
"South View affiliate ", permit me to comment as a parent. My wife and I are trying to raise kids who are
responsible citizens, motivated students and physically active. The education my kids receive is first rate.
I wish I could say the same for their access to quality facilities. Three of my children participate in the
Edina Basketball Association. None of them have been fortunate enough to make a traveling team. This
means my kids (as do the vast majority of Edina basketball players) play in the "house" program. Let me
explain how a typical season works. Late November- December: the season begins with 2 practices and 1
game followed by 17 -20 days off for the holidays. January - February: 8 -10 games and 1 or 2 practices. A
playoff tournament is usually scheduled for the 1st week of March, adding an additional 1 -3 games. As a
coach, I can tell you that finding extra practice /scrimmage time is next to impossible. When totaled, our
kids are "playing" basketball for 14 weeks. During these 14 weeks the kids get on the court 13 -18 times (at
1 hour per game /practice). Barely once a week!!! This is clearly insufficient court time for kids to develop
skills.
I believe the renovation of the gyms at South View combined with the additional new gym space
contemplated in the proposed referendum will greatly improve the situation. I urge the Edina City Council
to support the proposal you are considering. The addition of gyms and upgrading of pools will benefit
many people of all ages. Access to these facilities will be a wonderful gift to our community. Let's make
the facilities in Edina match the great education offered by our school system.
Respectfully, Q
C;
Thomas M. Sullivan
4612 Cascade Lane
Edina, MN 55436
January 16, 2001
Mayor.Dennis Maetzold
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, M' N 55424
Dear -Mr. Maetzold,
My husband and I support the investment in the renovations to the pools, playing fields,
and gyms in the City of Edina. We are especially interested in the pool(s) improvement
and would like there to be a new pool facility in the City. Our son learned to swim at
South View, which is now very inadequate. He now swims on the Boys Varsity
Swimming and Diving Team. We have a State High School Swimming Championship
Team. Shouldn't we have a great training and meet facility?
We are very supportive of a new pool. Within the last year we have walked. around in our
neighborhoods to acquire signatures on a petition for a new pool. Many of the suburban
school districts have wonderful indoor swimming pool facilities. Our close neighbor,
Richfield, is an excellent example. Edina is a wonderful place to live and its citizens have
always provided our children with great facilities and reasons to be proud.
This monetary investment will increase the value of Edina's physical assets and be a great
investment in our students. It's time we step up and once again provide our students with
first -rate facilities.
Sincerely,
Sc ar 4 �n/XhAfM-oss
Cc Nan Faust
James B. Hovland
Scott W. Johnson
John Keptios.
PROPOSED REFERENDUM PROJECTS
(Sorted by location)
Alden Park
Replace playground equipment $ 100,000 $ 100,000
Arden Park
Keyless entry system for shelter. building
$
5,000
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment
$
7,000
$ 12,000
Arneson Park
Keyless entry system for greenhouse and terrace room
$
7,000
Replace roof Arneson house
$
8,000
Steel siding Arneson house
$
25,000
Replace windows Arneson house
$
7,000
Lift station and sanitary sewer hook -up
$
35,000
Park lot repair and.curbing
$
50,000
Asphalt pathway from house to gazebo /parking lot
$
30,000,.
$ 162,000
Birchcrest Park
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment
$
7,000
$ 7,000
Braemar Park
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment
$
7,000
Soccer field regrade, seed & drain tile (sand field)
$
180,000
Soccer field irrigation
$
15,000
Courtney Field #4 regrade, seed & drain tile (sand field)
$
100,000
Courtney Field #4 fencing
$
40,000
Courtney Field #4 irrigation
$
15,000
Keyless entry system for concessions building
$
5,000
Replace concessions building Courtney ball fields
$
800,000
Replace maintenance garage Courtney ball fields
$
30,000
Replace dugouts Courtney Field #4
$
40,000
$ 1,232,000
Bredesen Park
Replace perimeter fencing
$
150,000
Replace roof comfort station
$
6,000
Keyless entry system for comfort station
$
5,000
$ 161,000
Page 1 of 6
Cornelia School Park
Softball field irrigation
Little league baseball field irrigation
Little league baseball field fencing
Baseball field irrigation (prep field)
Youth softball field regrade, seed & drain tile
Youth softball field fencing
Little league baseball field regrade, seed & drain tile
Adult softball field regrade, seed & drain tile
Adult softball field fencing (convert to baseball field)
Dugout shade covers for 3 ball fields
Pathway repair and addition /completion
Countryside Park
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment
West baseball field irrigation
West baseball field fencing
Dugout shade covers for ball field
Keyless entry system for shelter building
New dugouts for west baseball field
Creek Valley Park
Keyless entry system for shelter building
Edinborough Park
Fox Meadow Park
Garden Park
Dugout shade covers for 2 ball fields
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment
Heights Park
Replace playground equipment
$. 20,000
$ 15,000
$ 60,000
$ 20,000
$ 50,000
$ 20,000
$ 40,000
$ 50,000
$ 60,000
$ 1,200
$ 100,000 $ 436,200
$
7,000
$
10,000
$
40,000
$
400
$
5,000
$
40,000 $ 102,400
$
51000 $ 5,000
none
none
$ 800
$ 7,000 $ 71,800
$ 100,000 $ 100,000
Highlands Park
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment $ 7,000
Soccer field irrigation $ 30,000
Softball field irrigation $ 20,000
Soccer field regrade, seed & drain tile (sand field) $ 180,000
Dugout shade covers for ball field $ 400
Keyless entry system for shelter building $ 5,000 $
Kojetin Park
Replace playground equipment
Page 2 of 6
$ 100,000 $
242,400
100,000
Lake Edina Park
none
Lewis Park
3 soccer fields - irrigation $ 60,000
West soccer field regrade, seed & drain tile (sand field) $ 180,000
East soccer field regrade, seed & drain tile (sand field) $ 180,000
Central soccer field regrade, seed & drain tile (sand field) $ 180,000 $ 600,000
McGuire Park
Replace playground equipment $ 100,000 $ 100,000
Melody Lake Park none
Normandale Park
Replace playground equipment $
Dugout shade covers for ball field $
Upgrade general skating rink $
Keyless entry system for shelter building $
Pamela Park
2 soccer fields - irrigation $
Senior soccer field regrade, seed & drain tile $
Lighting for 3 softball fields $
Dugout shade covers for 3 ball fields $
Keyless entry system for shelter building $
Replace playground equipment $
Rosland Park
Baseball field irrigation $
Reorient baseball field (use existing soils) $
Baseball field fencing (reorient field) $
Ornamental fencing between road and pathway $
Dugout shade covers for ball field $
Pathway repair $
Parking lot repair and curbing $
St. John's Park none
Sherwood Park
Replace playground equipment $
Picnic shelter and pump house building renovation $
Strachauer Park
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment $
Page 3 of 6
115,000
400
8,000
5,000 $ 128,400
40,000
180,000
160,000
1,200
5,000
150,000 $ 536,200
20,000
30,000
20,000
60,000
400
75,000
400,000 $ 605,400
100,000
40,000 $ 140,000
7,000 $ 7,000
Tingdale Park
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment $ 7,000 $ 7,000
Todd Park
Softball field regrade, etc. (use existing soils) $ 30,000
Dugout shade covers for ball field $ 400
Softball field irrigation $ 15,000
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment $ 7,000 $ 52,400
Tupa Park
Fire suppression system for Grange Hall and
Cahill School buildings $ 50,000
Grounds irrigation $ 20,000 $ 70,000
Utley Park
$
95,000
Keyless entry system for comfort station
$
5,000 $ 5,000
Van Valkenburg Park
$
40,000
Keyless entry system for concessions and
$
800
maintenance buildings
$
7,000
Grading and landscaping new neighborhood park
$
100,000
Hard surface court neighborhood park
$
15,000
Pathway
$
30,000
Playground equipment and miscellaneous park equipment
$
100,000
3 batting cages softball complex
$
60,000 $ 312,000
Walnut Ridge Park
Pathway repair
$
60,000
Rebuild tennis courts
$
50,000
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment
$
7,000 $ 117,000
Weber Park
Softball and baseball fields - regrade, seed & drain tile
$
95,000
Softball and baseball fields - irrigation
$
60,000
Softball and baseball field fencing
$
40,000
Dugout shade covers for 2 ball fields
$
800
Parking lot repair and curbing
$
200,000
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment
$
7,000 $ 402,800
Williams Park
none
Wooddale Park
Softball field irrigation $ 15,000
Softball field regrade, seed & drain tile (use existing soils) $ 60,000
Softball field safety fencing in front of dugouts $ 6,000
ADA compliant access paths to playground equipment $ 7,000 $ 88,000
Page 4 of 6
York Park none
Yorktown Park
Indoor skate park (YMCA/3 -city cooperative venture)
$
80,000
$ 80,000
ACTIVITIES CENTER (SENIOR CENTER)
Indoor furnishings (tables, chairs, computers, etc.)
$
225,000
$ 225,000
EDINA AQUATIC CENTER
Complete master plan renovation
$
1,500,000
$ 1,500,000
EDINA ART CENTER
Pottery room expansion
$
400,000
Fire suppression system
$
40,000
Clark gift shop expansion
$
26,000
$ 466,000
BRAEMAR ARENA
Fire suppression system
$
100,000
ice - resurfacing room relocation
$
250,000
Heating & dehumidification upgrade East Arena
$
100,000
$ 450,000
MISCELLANEOUS
Replace Showmobile
$
100,000
Registration /scheduling computer software
$
50,000
$ 150,000
WEST CAMPUS PROJECTS
Reorient EHS baseball field
$
489,000
Add 2 new softball fields
$
938,000
Add 2 new soccer fields lower level
$
371,000
Renovate 2 soccer fields upper level
$
479,000
Renovate soccer field lower level inside track
$
333,000
Add new soccer field Creek Valley (use onsite soils)
$
54,000
Add 2 new gyms Valley View
$
3,533,000
Add new locker rooms and public toilets Valley View
$
1,503,000
Add new 25 meter x 25 yard pool with dive well
$
4,123,000
Add new concessions area Valley View pool /gym area
$
150,000
Add new Black Box Theater without dance studio
$
1,600,000
$ 13,573,000
Page.5 of 6
EAST CAMPUS PROJECTS
Concord Elementary (addition of one gym)
South View (addition of one gym)
South View renovate gym (bleachers & floor)
South View Pool renovation
ECC large gym renovation
ECC small gym renovation
ECC gym lobby /concessions stand
Renovate ECC auditorium and lobby
Kuhlman Stadium Renovation:
New 5000 home bleacher; .
New 1500 visitor bleacher;
Press box;
New home entrance plaza and gate at west entrance;
New visitor gate at northeast corner;
New pavement between storage /concession building and
running track;
New pavement under visitor bleacher for outdoor storage;
Relocate existing concession building on visitor side;
Locate satellites on visitor side;
Reconstruction and widening. of track to 8 lane /relocate
field events;
One 70' x 300' and two 40' x 100' storage buildings under
the home bleachers (athletic association storage);
One 40'x 80' unheated concession building with toilets;
Improve and ugrade lighting;
Improve drainage (perimeter curb and drain tile);
Resilient turf football /soccer field;
Bubble structure;. and
Landscaping;
ECC Campus Improvements:
Middle parking lot expansion;
New pedestrian access pathway from lower /east to
upper /west campus; and
Resilient turf "middle" football /soccer field
TOTAL
Page 6 of 6
$ 1,123,600
$ 2,543,000
$ 360,000
$ 451,000
$ 35,000
$ 284,000
$ 242,000
$ 1,385,000
$ 7,081,000
$ 1,334,000 $ 14,838,600
$ 37,121,600
PROPOSED REFERENDUM PROJECTS
(Sorted by project)
MISCELLANEOUS
Replace Showmobile
$
100,000
Registration /scheduling computer software
$
50,000 $ 150,000
GYMNASIUMS AND LOBBY IMPROVEMENTS
One new gym scenario at Concord
$
1,123,600
Large ECC gymnasium improvements
$
35,000
Small ECC gymnasium improvements
$
284,000
ECC gym lobby and concession are renovation
$
242,000
One new gym South View
$
2,543,000
South View gym improvements (bleachers & wood floors)
$
360,000
Two new gyms at Valley View
$
3,533,000 $ 8,120,600
CONCESSIONS STAND
New concessions stand at pool and gym complex
$
150,000 $ 150,000
KUHLMAN STADIUM IMPROVEMENTS
New 5000 home bleacher;
New 1500 visitor bleacher;
Press box;
New home entrance plaza and gate at west entrance;
New visitor gate at northeast corner;
New pavement between storage /concession building and
running track;
New pavement under visitor bleacher for outdoor storage;
Relocate existing concession building on visitor side;
Locate satellites on visitor side;
Reconstruction and widening of track to 8 lane /relocate
field events;
One 70' x 300' and two 40' x 100' storage buildings under
the home bleachers;
One 40'x 80' unheated concession building with toilets;
Improve and ugrade lighting;
Improve drainage (perimeter curb and drain tile);
Resilient turf football /soccer field;
Bubble structure; and
Landscaping; $ 7,081,000 $ 7,081,000
Page 1 of 6
A,
ECC CAMPUS IMPROVEMENTS
Middle parking lot expansion;
New pedestrian access pathway from lower /east to
upper /west campus; and
Resilient turf at middle field; $ 1,334,000 $ 1,334,000
BLACK BOX THEATER, AUDITORIUM & LOBBY
ECC auditorium and lobby renovation
$
1,385,000
Black Box Theater EHS
$
1,600,000 $ 2,985,000
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT SITES
ADA COMPLIANT ACCESS PATHS TO EQUIPMENT:
Arden Park
$
7,000
Birchcrest Park
$
7,000
Braemar Park
$
79000
Countryside Park
$
7,000
Garden Park
$
7,000
Highlands Park
$
7,000
Strachauer Park
$
7,000
Tingdale Park
$
7,000
Todd Park
$
7,000
Walnut Ridge Park
$
7,000
Weber Park
$
7,000
Wooddale Park
$
7,000 $ 84,000
REPLACEMENT PLAYGROUND EQUIP:
Alden Park
$
100,000
Heights Park
$
100,000
Kojetin Park
$
100,000
McGuire Park
$
100,000
Normandale Park
$
115,000
Pamela Park
$
150,000
Sherwood Park
$
100,000 $ 765,000
Page 2 of 6
BALL FIELD & GROUNDS IRRIGATION:
Braemar soccer field
$
15,000
Cornelia School Park little league field :
$
15,000
Cornelia School Park (youth softball field)
$
20,000
Cornelia School Park (adult softball field)
$
20,000
Countryside Park (west baseball field)
$
10,000
Courtney Ball Fields (Braemar Park field #4)
$
15,000
Highlands Park (soccer field)
$
30,000
Highlands Park (1 softball field)
$
20,000
Kenneth Rosland Park.(baseball field)
$
.20,000
Lewis Park (3 soccer fields)
$_
60,000
Pamela Park (senior soccer field)
$
20,000
Pamela Park (junior soccer field)
$
20,000
Todd Park
$
15,000
Tupa Park
$
20,000
Weber Park (softball field and baseball field)
$
60,000
Wooddale Park
$
15,000
BALL FIELD (NEW OR RENOVATE)
Add one new soccer field at Creek Valley
$
54,000
Reorient EHS baseball field
$
489,000
Add 2 new softball fields at EHS
$
938,000
Add 2 new soccer fields lower level at EHS
$
371,000
Renovate 2 soccer field upper level at EHS
$
479,000
Renovate lower level soccer field within track at EHS
$
333,000
Renovate Braemar soccer field
$
180,000
Renovate Cornelia School Park little.league field
$
40,000
Renovate Cornelia School Park (youth softball field)
$
50,000
Renovate Cornelia School Park (adult softball field)
$
50,000
Renovate Courtney Ball Fields (Braemar Park field #4)
$
100,000
Renovate Highlands Park (senior soccer field)
$
180,000
Renovate Lewis Park (east soccer field)
$
180,000
Renovate Lewis Park (west soccer field)
$
180,000
Renovate Lewis Park (central soccer field)
$
180,000
Renovate Pamela Park (senior soccer field)
$
180,000
Renovate Rosland Park (reorient baseball field)
$
30,000
Renovate Todd Park softball field -
$
30,000
Renovate Weber Park (1 baseball and 1 softball field)
$
95,000
Renovate Wooddale Park baseball field
$
60,000
BALL FIELD OUTDOOR LIGHTING.
3 softball fields at Pamela Park $
Page 3 of 6
$ 375,000
$ 4,199,000
160,000 $ 160,000
FENCING:
$
5,000
Bredesen Park (perimeter fencing)
$
150,000
Cornelia School little league field
$
60,000
Cornelia School youth softball field
$
20,000
Cornelia School Park (adult softball field)
$
60,000 .
Countryside west baseball field (entire field)
$
40,000
Courtney Ball Fields (field #4)
$
40,000
Rosland Park (playground /picnic area)
$
60,000
Rosland Park (baseball field)
$
20,000
Weber Park (baseball and softball fields)
$
40,000
Wooddale Park (softball field safety fencing)
$
6,000 $
SHADE COVERS FOR DUGOUTS:
Cornelia School Park (3 fields)
$
1,200
Rosland Park baseball field
$
400
Normandale Park baseball field
$
400
Weber Park (2 fields)
$
800
Countryside Park west baseball field
$
40.0
Garden Park (2 fields)
$
800
Highlands Park softball field
$
400
Pamela Park (3 softball fields)
$
1,200
Todd Park softball field.
$
400 $
FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM:
Tupa Park (Grange Hall and Cahill School)
$
50,000 $
KEYLESS ENTRY SYSTEM
Arden Park
$
5,000
Arneson Park (greenhouse & terrace room)
$
7,000
Braemar Park
$
5,000
Bredesen Park
$
5,000
Countryside Park
$
52000
Creek Valley Park
$
5,000
Highlands Park
$
59000
Normandale Park
$
5,000
Pamela Park
$
5,000.
Utley Park
$
5,000
Van Valkenburg Park (2 buildings)
$
7,000 $
REPLACE CONCESSIONS BUILDING:
Courtney Fields Complex - Braemar Park. $ 800,000 $
PICNIC SHELTER AND PUMP HOUSE BUILDING
RENOVATION:
Sherwood Park $ 40,000 $
Page 4 of 6
496,000
6,000
50,000
59,000
40,000
r
REPLACE MAINTENANCE GARAGE:
Courtney Fields Complex - Braemar Park
ROOF REPLACEMENT:
Arneson Acres Park building & museum
Bredesen Park comfort station
ARNESON ACRES PARK BUILDING:
Steel siding
Replacement windows
COMPLETION OF VAN VALKENBURG PARK:
Grading and landscaping
Hard surface court
Pathway
Playground equipment & misc. park equip.
Van Valkenburg Park (3 batting cages)
LIFT STATION FOR SANITARY SEWER:
Arneson Acres Park (greenhouse)
PATHWAY REPAIR/ADDITIONS:
Arneson Acres Park
Cornelia School Park
Rosland Park
Walnut Ridge Park
PARKING LOT REPAIR/ADDITION:
Arneson Park
Rosland Park
Weber Park
ACTIVITIES CENTER (SENIOR CENTER)
INDOOR FURNISHINGS:
Tables, chairs, computers, sound system etc.
SKATE PARK DEVELOPMENTS:
YMCA indoor skate park (tier I & II)
BASEBALL DUGOUTS:
Countryside Park west field
Courtney Ball Fields (field #4)
TENNIS COURTS:
Walnut Ridge Park (rebuild)
Page 5 of 6
$
30,000 $ 30,000
8,000
6,000 $ 14,000
25,000
7,000 $ 32,000
100,000
15,000
30,000
100,000
60,000 $ 305,000
$ 35,000 $ 35,000
$ 30,000
$ 100,000
$ 75,000
$ 60,000 $ 265,000
$ 50,000
$ 400,000
$ 200,000 $ 650,000
$ 225,000 $ 225,000
40,000
40,000 $ 80,000
50,000 $ 50,000
GENERAL SKATING RINK UPGRADE:
Normandale Park $ 8,000 $ 8,000
POOLS AND LOCKER ROOMS
New 25 meter pool at Valley View
$
4,123,000
New locker rooms at Valley View
$
1,503,000
Renovate South View Pool
$
451,000
Edina Aquatic Center (complete master plan renovation)
$
1,500,000
$ 7,577,000
EDINA ART CENTER:
Pottery room expansion
$
400,000
Fire suppression system
$
40,000
Clark gift shop expansion
$
26,000
$ 466,000
BRAEMAR ARENA IMPROVEMENTS
Fire suppression system
$
100,000
ice - resurfacing room relocation
$
250,000
Heating & dehumidification upgrade East Arena
$
100,000
$ 450,000
TOTAL
$ 37,121,600
Page 6 of 6
BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE PRIORITIZED LIST
1. ADA Compliant Access Paths to Equipment
2. Gymnasiums and Lobby Improvements
3. Ball Fields New or Renovate
4. Ball Fields and Grounds Irrigation
5. Kuhlman Stadium
6. Fire Suppression System (Tupa Park & Braemar)
7. New Registration and Scheduling Computer Software
8. Artificial Turf Fields
9. Replacement Playground Equipment
10. Pools and Locker Rooms
11. Bubble /Dome Structure
12. Keyless Entry System
13. Senior Center Indoor Furnishings
14. Roof Replacement
15. ECC Campus Improvements
16. Arneson Acres Park Building
17. Completion of Van Valkenburg
18. Pathway Repair/ Addition
19. Edina Art Center
20. Lift Station for Sanitary Sewer - Arneson Acres
21. Fencing
22. Pamela Park - Ball Field Outdoor Lighting
23. Parking Lot Repair/ Addition
24. Replace Showmobile
25. Picnic Shelter and Pump House Building Renovation
26. Black Box Theater, ECC Auditorium, and Lobby
27. Concessions Stand at Valley View
28. Replace Concessions Building at Courtney Fields
29. Tri City Skate Park Development
30. Braemar Arena Improvements
31. Construction of Baseball Dugouts
32. Tennis Courts
33. Replace Courtney Fields Maintenance Garage
34. Shade Covers for Dugouts
35. Normandale Park General Skating Rink Upgrade
SrT
A
E
.DI z1112 ►��
Al
,eaa
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
Agenda Item IV
n
Q�
From: Rick Petersburg, SAMA
Consent
_
City Assessor
Information Only ❑
Date: January 16, 2001
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
®
To Council
Subject: SET BOARD OF REVIEW
Action ®
Motion
DATE
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Set April 16, 2001, 5:00 P.M. for Board of Review
Information /Background:
On or before February 15th of each year the County Assessor is required to give
written notice to the City.Clerk of the day and time when the Board of Review shall meet
in the assessment districts in the county. In order to facilitate this the City Council
(acting as the Board of Review) is required to select a hearing date between April 1st
and May 31st of each year. The Board.of Review is allowed 20 days to complete their
business from the date of the initial hearing. In order to allow for an extension of the 20
day period (should one be necessary) I would recommend setting the initial hearing
date on April 16, 2001 (an open Monday) at 5:00 P.M. Previous dates have been
4/10/00, 4/12/99, 4/13/98, 4/14/97, 4/22/96, 4/10/95, 4/11/94, and 4/12/93, all
convening at 5:00 P.M. The initial meeting would be to hear testimony from property
owners and assessing staff - once all testimony is heard the Board would temporarily
adjourn and then reconvene at a later date in order to make decisions based on
previously heard testimony.
Ok Le
v � �y
.f
Way"
lose
REPORURECOMMENDATION
To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
, Agenda Item
IV. E.
From: Susan Heiberg
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
❑
Date: January 16, 2001
Mgr. Recommends
To HRA
®
To Council
Subject: Select Dates for the Council's
®
Motion
Ej
Annual Meeting and
Resolution
❑
Volunteer Recognition
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
RECOMMENDATION:
1) That the Council select one of the following dates for the Annual Meeting.in
2001 to be held in Centennial Lakes Centrum at 5:00 PM:
Monday, March 19`"
Thursday, March 22 °d
Monday, March 260'
Tuesday, March 27th
Wednesday, March 28th
Thursday, March 29`"
NOTE: The 2000 Annual Meeting was held at Braemar on Thursday, March
16'. We have switched locations each year. Edina schools' 2001 spring break
is the week beginning Monday, April 2 °d. Easter is April 151".
2) That the Council select one of the following dates for the Volunteer Recognition
Reception in 2001 to be held at Edinborough Park at 5:00 PM:
Monday, April 23`d, or Tuesday, April 24', or Monday, April 30"
NOTE: The last Volunteer Recognition Reception was held on Tuesday, April
25"', 2000.
oe
Cn
v � �y
• rMro'�a ��
To:
From:
Date:
City Council
Dennis Maetzold
Mayor
January 16, 2001
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
Agenda Item IV.F.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
® To Council
Subject: Re- appointments and
appointments to Boards, Action ® Motion
Commissions and
Committees ❑ Resolution
Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Recommendation:
Endorse Mayor's recommendations for annual re- appointments and new appointments to
Edina's advisory boards, commissions and committees as presented.
Info/Background:
Letters were sent to members of all Edina's advisory boards, commissions and committees with
terms expiring February 1, 2001, inquiring whether or not they would accept reappointment to
their respective boards. The overwhelming response of most members was to accept re-
appointment. However, following is a list of those members who declined reappointment and
in some cases have resigned from service:
• Community Health Services Advisory Board - Jan Borman and Patrick Wilson have
declined re- appointment. This committee was reduced in membership to seven members
during 1999 so only one replacement member is needed.
• Heritage Preservation Board - Marilyn Curtis and Joan Shoening, both serving terms until
2/1/02 are either moving or have left Edina.
• Human Relations Commissioner Jim Zappa was not able to accept re- appointment.
• Park Board will be loosing three members - Andrew Herring has declined re- appointment.
Scot Housh and Chuck Mooty both have resigned due to other obligations (Scot to the City
Council and Chuck to a new position as CEO of Dairy Queen).
• Recycling and Solid Waste Commission needs to find another student to replace KC: Glaser.
• East Edina Housing Foundation needs to replace Ron Ringling.
Re- appointments - January 16, 2001
Page 2
Following' is the list of our current Board /Commission /Committee members who have
accepted re- appointment.
Name
Committee Name
Term Expiring
Arthur H. Dickey
Art Center Committee
2/1/04
Linda Kieffer
Art Center Committee
2/1/04
DeLores Paul
Art Center Committee
2/1/04
Kathy Frey - Consumer Community Health Committee
2/1/03
Quentin A. Collins
Construction Board of Appeals
2/1/04
Edward Noonan
Construction Board of Appeals
2/1/04
John McCauley
Heritage Preservation Board
2/1/03
Herman Ratelle
Heritage Preservation Board
2/1/03
Lois Wilder
Heritage Preservation Board
2/1/03
Donald W. Wray
Heritage Preservation Board
2/1/03
Carol Carmichiel
Human Relations Commission - Council Appointee
2/1/04
David Fredlund
Park Board
2/1/04
Thomas White
Park Board
2/1/04
David Byron
Planning Commision
2/1/04
Gordon V. Johnson
Planning Commision
2/1/04
Geoffrey Workinger
Planning Commision
2/1/04
Anne Cronin
Recycling and Solid Waste Commision
2/1/03
Kathryn Frey
Recycling and Solid Waste Commision
2/1/03
Inns His
Recycling and Solid Waste Commision
2/1/03
Donald W. Patton
Zoning Board of Appeals
2/1/04
I recommend for appointment the following persons to fill the Board /Committee /Commission
vacancies as noted:
Name Committee Name Term Expiring
William Crawford Heritage Preservation Board 2/1/02
John Hobd!Ay Human Relations Commission 2/1/04
Ardis Wexler Park Board 2/1/04
Michael Damman Park Board - partial term of Scot Hough 2/1/03
I will continue seeking persons for the Community, Health Committee (consumer term to 2/1/03)
Heritage Preservation Board (partial term to 2/1/02) and the East Edina Housing Foundation (term
to 2/1/04). 1 am also looking for two Edina High School students to serve on the Park Board(partial
term to 2/1/02) and Recycling and Solid Waste Commission (term to 2/1/03)
R55CKREG3 LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 -1/5/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description
217083 1/5/01 100608 3M CO HGF0878
91530 LETTERS FOR SIGNS 10271 TP80829 1325.6531 SIGNS & POSTS
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 1
Business Unit
STREET NAME SIGNS
10272
03053129
915.30
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10155
217084
1/5/01
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
102128
AEARO CO.
00032795
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
30.00
10424
00032794
SAFETY GLASSES
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
30.00
217085
115/01
102609
ALL SAINTS BRANDS
160.25
356.63
15.95
532.83
217086
1/5/01
100575
ALL -SAFE DIV. OF ALL FIRE
TEST
355.23
INSPECT FIRE EXTINGUISHERS
355.23
217087
1/5/01
100867
ALSTAD, MARIAN '
25.35
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
25.35
217088.
1/5/01
101874
ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS
INC.
350.56
PAGER PROGRAMMER
350.56
217089
1/5101
103867
ANDERSON, ARDELL
104.00
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
104.00
217090
1/5101
103989
ANDERSON, KRISTIAN
75.00
ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE CHECKS
75.00
217091
1/5/01
101187
BARTOLETTI, SUE
119.60
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
119.60
217092
1/5101
102449
BATTERY WHOLESALE INC.
265.03
BATTERIES
187.58
BATTERIES
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 1
Business Unit
STREET NAME SIGNS
10272
03053129
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10155
00000719
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10423
00032795
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10424
00032794
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10273 35726
10224 122600
10274 26003
10225 122600
10150 122200
10226 122600
10112 11127
10113 10955
1646.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
14706-406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
1188.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIQUOR LICENSE INVESTIGATION
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
ART CENTER REVENUES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
Vendor
Explanation
20410100
5862.5512
452.61
VERNON SELLING
10343
33196300
217093
115/01
YORK SELLING
.102346
BEARCOM
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
76.80
RADIO REPAIRS
76.80
217094
115/01
101355
BELLBOY CORPORATION
58.21
892.75
83.52
99.47
1,133.95
217095
115/01
100661
BENN, BRADLEY
495.30
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
495.30
217096
1/5/01
100648
BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS
102.21
HEATERS
68.79
STATION SUPPLIES
171.00
217097
1/5/01
104003
BK ROOFING INC.
12,620.25
ROOF REPAIRS
12,620.25
217098
1/5/01
103866
BLALOCK, KAREN
26.00
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
26.00
217099
1/5/01
100711
BLOOD, DAVID
100.00
POLICE SERVICE
100.00
217100
1/5101
102276
BLUHM, KIMBERLEE
51.38
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
51.38
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 -1/5/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
Account No Account Description
115/01 13:05:10
Page - 2
Business Unit
10275 1754862 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10181
33191800
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10182
20410100
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10343
33196300
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10344
20415100
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10227 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
10276
8314261
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10277
8314260
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
.10278
24502
1375.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
PARKING RAMP
10228
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
10466
010201
1419.6102
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
RESERVE PROGRAM
10229 122600
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
217101 1/5101 102648 BOOSALIS, DAVID
75.00 ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE CHECKS 10151 122200 1188.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIQUOR LICENSE INVESTIGATION
75.00
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page- 3
Account No Account Description Business Unit
1188.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIQUOR LICENSE INVESTIGATION
1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5923.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK COLLECTION SYSTEMS
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM
271.28 TOTE BOXES 10280 400410801 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE
271.28
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
115101 —115/01
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation
PO # Doc No
Inv No
217102
115/01
103990
BORCHARDT, CRAIG
75.00
ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE CHECKS 10152
122200
75.00
217103
1/5101
100623
BOSS PUMPING
95.00
SEPTIC WORK
10279
2326
95.00
217104
1/5101
101553
BRIGHT, CAROL
43.55
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10230
122600
43.55
217105
1/5/01
100873
BROCKWAY. MAUREEN
65.65
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10231
122600
65.65
217106
1/5/01
100583
BROWN, PATRICIA A.
84.50
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10232
122600
84.50
217107
1/5/01
100669
BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS
INC.
416.88
ROCK
10114
DEC 15
416.88
217108
115/01
103995
BRYAN, LINDA
81.09
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10233
122600
81.09
217109
1/5/01
101768
BUELL, KIM
109.20
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10234
122600
109.20
217110
115101
100776
BUTLER, GEORGE
100.00
POLICE SERVICE
10464
010201
100.00
217111
1/5/01
103005
C &H DISTRIBUTORS INC
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page- 3
Account No Account Description Business Unit
1188.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIQUOR LICENSE INVESTIGATION
1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5923.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK COLLECTION SYSTEMS
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM
271.28 TOTE BOXES 10280 400410801 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE
271.28
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 -1/5/01
PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description
10235 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation
217112
1/5/01
102046
CAMPE, HARRIET
20731987
1318.6525
58.50
10282
20720513
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
SALT
58.50
20731142
1318.6525
217113
1/5/01
20734561
100677
CARGILL INC.
SALT
10414
20734859
2,705.60
SALT
ICE CONTROL
672.48
ICE CONTROL
7,467.42
ICE CONTROL
2,038.82
ICE CONTROL
692.41
ICE CONTROL
1,333.58
ICE CONTROL
1,328.45
ICE CONTROL
16,238.76
217114
1/5101
100678
CARLSON PRINTING
115.02
--
BUSINESS CARDS
115.02
217115
1/5/01
104001
CARLSON, PAM
14.00
PARKING PERMIT REFUND
14.00
217116
1/5/01
104018
CATRON, ELIZABETH
14.00
PARKING PERMIT REFUND
14.00
217117
115/01
103996
CHESTER, AMY
28.60
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
28.60
217118
1/5/01
100689
CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIP.
512.00
RIT PAK
2,508.00
AIR PAK
3,020.00
217119
1/5/01
101323
CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS
16_9.81
GLOVES, FIRST AID ITEMS
169.81
217120
1/5/01
103997
CROUCH, JENNIFER
61.10
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
r
.
10115
20722882
1318.6525
SALT
10116
20725584
1318.6525
SALT
10281
20731987
1318.6525
SALT
10282
20720513
1318.6525
SALT
10283
20731142
1318.6525
SALT
10413
20734561
1318.6525
SALT
10414
20734859
1318.6525
SALT
10285 00075642 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10284 122700 4090.4751 PARKING PERMITS
10463 122900 4090.4751 PARKING PERMITS
10236 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10286 56437 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10287 56373 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10288 01418761 5910.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10237 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 4
Business Unit
ART CENTER REVENUES
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
STREET REVOLVING
STREET REVOLVING
ART CENTER REVENUES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
GENERAL (BILLING)
ART CENTER REVENUES
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check # -
Date
Amount
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
Vendor
Explanation
119304
5862.5515
61.10
VERNON SELLING
10183
120019
217121
1/5/01
YORK SELLING
100177
CURTIS -RAND INDUSTRIES INC
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
151.64
10185
119782
PENCILS
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
151.64
.120020
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
217122
.1/5/01
120021
103176
DANICIC, JOHN
VERNON SELLING
10345
317700
85.80
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
85.80
217123
115/01
102478
DAY DISTRIBUTING
697.20
27.15
91.50
3,623.80
1,051.30
18.40
3,501.75
9,011.10
217124
1/5/01
100718
DELEGARD TOOL CO.
253.47
SCREW DRIVERS, PLIERS
253.47
217125
1/5/01
100731
DPC INDUSTRIES
1,780.66
WATER CHEMICALS
1,780.66
217126
1/5/01
100736
E -Z -GO TEXTRON
180.96
CART REPAIR PARTS
180.96
217127
1/5101
100739
EAGLE WINE
937.00
232.00
127.00
2,909.38
378.09
2,460.47
17.56
1,540.57
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 --1/5/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
Account No Account Description
10289 198417 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10238 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
115/01 13:05:10
Page - 5
Business Unit
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
ART CENTER REVENUES
10156
119195
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
10157
119304
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10183
120019
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10184
120018
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10185
119782
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
10386
.120020
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10387
120021
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
10415
114906
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10117
7000 - 1379061
5915.6586
WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES
WATER TREATMENT
10292 0668209 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS GOLF CARS
10158
317032
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10159
317113
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10160
317125
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10186
318200
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10187
_ 317693
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10188
317694
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10189
317698
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10345
317700
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
Vendor
_- -
Explanation
- - -_-
726095
5842.5514
501.50
YORK SELLING
10162
725523
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
120.70
10190
728329
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
9,224.27
728860
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
217128
1/5/01
729249
100740
EARL F. ANDERSEN INC.
YORK SELLING
10390
729188
177.43
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
REPAIR WORK
729181
5842.5515
177.43
YORK SELLING
10392
030559
217129
1/5/01
YORK SELLING
100741
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
8,040.75
3,447.60
1,658.15
4,227.60
101.00
10,769.45
69.55
63.00
28,377.10
217130
1/5/01
100744
EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
1,000.00
CHAMBER GALA 2001
1,000.00
CHAMBER GALA 2001
1,000.00
CHAMBER GALA 2001
3,000.00
217131
1/5/01
100049
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC
781.25
CIP CONSULTING
781.25
217132
1/5/01
103988
EICHMAN, NATE
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 -- 115101
PO # Doc No Inv No
10346 317699
10425 319822
75.00 ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE CHECKS
75.00
217133 1/5/01 100748 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
26.91 FACE MASK, CARTRIDGES
26.91
217134 1/5/01 100749 EMPLOYEES CLUB
650.00 SUPPLIES
650.00
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 6
Account No Account Description Business Unit
5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
10290
'28704A
1647.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
PATHS & HARD SURFACE
10161
726095
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10162
725523
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
10190
728329
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
10388
728860
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
10389
729249
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10390
729188
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10391
729181
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10392
030559
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10481
22232
5820.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
50TH STREET GENERAL
10481
22232
5840.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
10481
22232
5860.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
10416
17884
1550.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
10153 122200
10118 17760 -00
10475 010201
1188.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIQUOR LICENSE INVESTIGATION
5921.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT
1500.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
LIFT STATION MAINT
CONTINGENCIES
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
Page - 7
Vendor
Explanation
217135
1/5/01
1470.6405 BOOKS & PAMPHLETS
104004
ESSIG, CRAIG
ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOT
5110.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
241.50
10427
36081
COURSE FEES
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
73.49
HANDBOOK
314.99
217136
1/5/01
100373
FARBER, SONIA
86.00
TEACHING AC
210.38
RECEPTION SUPPLIES
8.00
CLEANING
39.00
FOR RECEPTION
80.00
CRAFT SUPPLIES
423.38
217137
115/01
102727
FORCE AMERICA
772.44
SENSORS
772.44
217138
1/5/01
101103
GRAINGER
329.86
PUMP, BLADES
329.86
217139
1/5/01
102217
GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC
416.00
1,733.00
1,003.00
3,152.00
217140
1/5/01
101518
GRAUSAM, STEVE
29.06
-
CELL PHONE CHARGES
29.06
217141
115/01
101186
GREENWOOD, JULIE
30.55
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
30.55
217142
1/5/01
100785
GREUPNER, JOE
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 -- 1/5/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10291 122700
10291 122700
6,000.00 FIRST PAYMENT OF RETAINER
6,000.00
217143 115/01 100782 GRIGGS COOPER & CO.
750.82
10239 120200
10239 120200
10239 120200
10239 120200
10239 120200
10293 042207
5110.6103
1/5/01 13:05:10
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
Page - 7
Account No Account Description
Business Unit
1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
1470.6405 BOOKS & PAMPHLETS
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
5110.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
5120.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI
5111.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT
5120.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOT
5110.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10119
495- 433176 -7
5915.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
WATER TREATMENT
10393
36085
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10426
36082
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10427
36081
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10120 122600
10240 122600
10476 120800
10163 317126
5841.6188 TELEPHONE
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
YORK OCCUPANCY
ART CENTER REVENUES
5410.6132 PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF ADMINISTRATION
5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
- --
Date
Amount
5842.5515
Vendor
-
Explanation
- -- --
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
133.55
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
57.40
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
57.40
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
42.25
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
78.19
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
3,451.49
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
15.00-
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
1,367.08
89.35
553.80
302.84
5,856.56
48.70 -
30.00-
15.00-
68.95
12,700.98
217144
1/5101
100918
GRIMSBY, NANCY
52.00
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
52.00
217145
1/5/01
103986
GRINNELL FIRE PROTECTION
160.00
SPRINKLER INSPECTION
160.00
217146
1/5/01
100155
GRITTON, KAY
35.10
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
35.10
217147
1/5/01
102869
GUEST, LISA
63.05
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
63.05
217148
1/5/01
100788
H &L MESABI
479.25
PLOW BLADES / RINKS
345.57
NOSES
657.28
-
SNOW PLOW BLADES
1,482.10
217149
1/5/01
100791
HALLMAN OIL COMPANY
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 -1/5/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10191 318198
10192 318201
10193 317701
10194 318196
10195 317696
10196 317697
10197 551696
10347 317705
10348 317704
10349 318802
10350 316681
10351 317707
10352 551755
10353 551698
10354 551695
10428 320373
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 8
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
10241 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
10121 036 -17278 5841.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE YORK OCCUPANCY
10242 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10243 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10294 047068 1648.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10295 047242 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10296 046961 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
ART CENTER REVENUES
ART CENTER REVENUES
SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation
303.20 GREASE
PETROLEUM PRODUCT
CITY OF EDINA
1/5/01
1553.6581
102967
Council Check Register
10124
380781
1553.6581
115/01 —1/5/01
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10300
REIMBURSE - TUITION & BOOKS
PO # Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
10122
45854
1553.6584
LUBRICANTS
10297
45969
1553.6584
LUBRICANTS
10298
45968
1553.6584
LUBRICANTS
217150
1/5/01
1553.6581
102967
HALSTEAD, TODD
10124
380781
1553.6581
395.60
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10300
REIMBURSE - TUITION & BOOKS
5913.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
395.60
GENERAL SUPPLIES
217151
1/5/01
101913
HANNA, JUNE
27.30
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
27.30
217152
1/5/01
102301
HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC
8,893.13
GAS - DIESEL
11,250.77
GAS - UNLEADED
20,143.90
217153
1/5/01
102079
HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC
1,044.09
REPAIR CURB STOP
1,044.09
217154
1/5/01
103861
HMONG FOLK ART
667.88
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
667.88
217155
115/01
102843
HO, JEFFERY D.
2,000.00
MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES
2,000.00
217156
1/5/01
101048
HOME JUICE
116.80
116.80
217157
1/5101
100842
HOUSEHOLD BANK F.S.B. (KNOX)
10.86
BRUSHES, PAILS
84.67
SHOVELS, SPADE
28.46
PLASTIC SHEATHING
29.03
BLADES, HAMMERS, NAILS
153.02
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page- 9
Business Unit
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10299 122700 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING
10244 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
10123
380787
1553.6581
GASOLINE
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10124
380781
1553.6581
GASOLINE
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10300
7262
5913.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION
10245
122600
5101.4413
ARTWORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
10474
010201
1470.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10198 00086691 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
10125
0217450404
5913.6556
TOOLS
10126
0217450401
5913.6556
TOOLS
10127
0217 -449488
5912.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10128
0217449451
5921.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
DISTRIBUTION
DISTRIBUTION
BUILDINGS
LIFT STATION MAINT
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Vendor
Explanation
217158
1/5/01
REPAIR PARTS
102384
HYDRANT SPECIALIST INC.
4206438 -01
5420.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
200.00
10356
1202894
HYDRANT
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
200.00
143825
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
217159
1/5/01
143821
101630
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #273
YORK SELLING
10394
360.00
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
CUSTODIAL OVERTIME
10395
1202893
360.00
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10396
217160
1/5/01
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
101403
J -CRAFT INC.
1202895
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
272.07
10398
1203685
LIGHTS
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
272.07
1203686
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
217161
115/01
1202897
101861
J.H. LARSON COMPANY
50TH ST SELLING
10430
1202891
27.24
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
BOLT -ON CB, STRAP
1202890
5822.5512
27.24
50TH ST SELLING
10432
1202889
217162
1/5/01
50TH ST SELLING
101400
JAMES, WILLIAM F
100.00
POLICE SERVICE
100.00
217163
1/5/01
103998
JEFFERSON, NANCY
36.40
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
36.40
217165
1/5101
100835
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO.
226.44
279.84
4,629.02
473.34
24.80-
49.60-
1,231.08
2,295.45
1.097.23
1,291.59
376.96
134.72
2,176.94
127.72
842.30
1,017.39
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 -1/5/01
PO # ' Doc No Inv No
10129 2289
Account No Account Description
5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 10
Business Unit
DISTRIBUTION
10130
2243
4077.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION
10301
26268
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10302
4206438 -01
5420.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CLUB HOUSE
10471 122900 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM
10246 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
10164
1200075
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
10165
12000629
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10355
1202899
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10356
1202894
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10357
143825
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10358
143821
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10394
1202888
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10395
1202893
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10396
1202898
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10397
1202895
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10398
1203685
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10399
1203686
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10429
1202897
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10430
1202891
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10431
1202890
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
10432
1202889
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
115/01 --1/5/01
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 11
Check # Date
Amount
Vendor Explanation PO #
Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
553.14
10433
1202896
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
1,069.21
10434
1202892
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
8,753.13
10435
1202602
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
3,676.29
10436
1202601
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
1,203.83
10437
1202599
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
4,231.04
10438
1202598
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
35,612 26
217166 115/01
101072 JOHNSON, WALTER
100.00
POLICE SERVICE
10473
010201
1419.6102
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
RESERVE PROGRAM
100.00
217167 1/5/01
100839 KAMAN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES
393.00
REPAIR PARTS
10303
Z192270
5422.6530
REPAIR PARTS
MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
322.78
REPAIR PARTS
10304
Z192271
5422.6530
REPAIR PARTS
MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
715.78
217168 115/01
102518 KATTLEMAN, DALE
76.06
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10247
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
76.06
217169 115/01
100944 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC.
28.00
10199
141976 -A
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
1,065.95
10200
143214
5662.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
1,684.00
10359
143211
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
108.00
10400
143215
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
2,172,90
10401
143222
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
90.00
10402
143223
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
5,148.85
217170 1/5/01
100846 KUETHER DISTRIBUTING CO
14.15
10166
286364
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
1,299.80
10167
286365
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
97.50
10439
286755
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
1,831.45
10440
286756
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
101.15
10441
286939
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
6,933.65
-
10442
286938
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10,277.70
217171 115/01
103987 LAURSEN, TONY
75.00
ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE CHECKS
10154
122200
1188.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
LIQUOR LICENSE INVESTIGATION
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
-- -- -
Date
Amount
Vendor
- - --
Explanation
- - -- - - --
75.00
217172
115/01
100852
LAWSON PRODUCTS INC.
357.56
SAW BLADES
450.93
WASHERS, NUTS, BOLTS
808.49
217173
1/5101
103993
LE CREUSET OF AMERICA
INC.
300.40
300.40
217174
1/5/01
103543
LEE, JONI C.
45.50
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
45.50
217175
1/5/01
100853
LEEF SERVICES
26.47
TOWELS
26.47
217176
1/5/01
100190
LIFEGUARD SYSTEMS INC.
795.00
WATER RESCUE LINES
795.00
217177
1/5/01
101594
LINDSKOOG, JACQUE
26.00
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
26.00
217178
1/5/01
101098
LUNDEEN, MARGA
25.00
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
25.00
217179
1/5/01
103264
LUNDGREN, BARBARA
_ 55.25
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
55.25
217180
1/5/01
102045
LYMAN, MARTHA
--
55.90
- -
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
55.90
217181
1/5/01
100864
MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC.
r
92.18
PIN & CLEVIS ROD
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
115/01 --1/5/01
PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description
10131 1436503 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10305 1441603 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 12
Business Unit
DISTRIBUTION
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10403 1079457 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
10248 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10306 378011 5422.6201 LAUNDRY
10307 3965 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10249 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10250 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10251 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10252 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10308 2010702 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
ART CENTER REVENUES
MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
ART CENTER REVENUES
ART CENTER REVENUES
ART CENTER REVENUES
ART CENTER REVENUES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
152.89
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
5842.5515
122.46
YORK SELLING
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
367.53
5822.5514
217182
1/5101
5822.5515
101451 MAKELA, BARB
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5514
34.31
50TH ST SELLING
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
34.31
5862.5514
217183
1/5/01
5862.5514
100868 MARK VII SALES
VERNON SELLING'
5822.5514
1,651.63
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
3.789.00
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
262.50
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
85.95
71.15
846.95
55.95
658.65
46.70
950.40
1,472.44
763.50
10.90
71.45
2,269.01
-
13,006.18
217184
1/5101
103232 MEHA
90.00
45.00
217185 1/5/01 100881 MERFELD, BURT
100.00
100.00
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
115/01 -1/5/01
Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No
CABLE THROTTLE 10309 2010864
SPROCKET -IDLER 10417 2010934
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC 10253 122600
WINTER CONFERENCE
WINTER CONFERENCE
POLICE SERVICE
217186 1/5/01 100882 MERIT SUPPLY
609.07 TOOLS
609.07
217187 1/5/01 102508 METZGER, MAURE ANN
147.23 ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10168 231595
10201 232085
10202 232086
10203 232082
10204 232081
10205 231432
10206 231433
10207 231867
10404 231597
10405 232067
10406 231596
10443 233574
10444 233575
10445 233691
10446 233690
10479 010201
10479 010201
10465 010201
10310 55454
10254 122600
Account No Account Description
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 13
Business Unit
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
ART CENTER, REVENUES
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
5842:5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING'
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
1490.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PUBLIC HEALTH
1491.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS LABORATORY
1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM
1646.6556 TOOLS
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
ART CENTER REVENUES
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 .-1/5101
PO # Doc No Inv No
Check #
Date
Amount
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
Vendor Explanation
ADVERTISING
65897138
147.23
ADVERTISING
YORK SELLING
217188
1/5/01
1318.6517
101161
MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY
217194 115/01
31873
802.52
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
BATH & KITCHEN SUPPLIES
MED BAG
31876
802.52
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
217195 115/01
217189
1/5/01
5913.6180
100692
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLING COM
10314
31870
264.56
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION
10315
31868
298.80
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION
10134
3403334
563.36
REPAIR PARTS
CITY HALL GENERAL
217190
115/01
1552.6530
104005
MILLER TRUCKING OF BUFFALO INC
10418
3404085
2,627.50
REPAIR PARTS
SAND
2,627.50
217191
1/5/01
100913
MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER &
450.00
REPAIR STOP BOX
975.00
REPLACE SERVICE
2.400.00
REPLACE SERVICE
1,875.00
REPLACE SERVICE
1,200.00
REPLACE SERVICE
6.900.00
217192
1/5/01
100522
MINNESOTA AIR
619.66
HEAT EXCHANGER
22.07
RELAY
574.44
PROGRAMMABLE THERMOSTAT
1 ,216.17
217193 1/5/01
62183128
101122 MINNESOTA MONTHLY PUBLICATIONS
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
166.66
ADVERTISING
65897138
166.67
ADVERTISING
YORK SELLING
166.67
ADVERTISING
1318.6517
500.00
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
217194 115/01
31873
104006 MOUNTAIN GEAR
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
109.95
MED BAG
31876
109.95
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
217195 115/01
10313
102551 NFPA
5913.6180
379.45
FIRE PROTECTION HANDBOOKS
10311 19352
Account No Account Description
1551.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 14
Business Unit
CITY HALL GENERAL
10360
62183128
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10447
65897138
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10312
15138
1318.6517
SAND GRAVEL & ROCK
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
10132
31873
5913.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION .
10133
31876
5913.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION
10313
31867
5913.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION
10314
31870
5913.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION
10315
31868
5913.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION
10134
3403334
1551.6530
REPAIR PARTS
CITY HALL GENERAL
10135
3403335
1552.6530
REPAIR PARTS
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
10418
3404085
1551.6530
REPAIR PARTS
CITY HALL GENERAL
10136 MM8274 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
10136 MM8274 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
10136 MM8274 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
10316 692998 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10317 0771866 1470.6614 FIRE PREVENTION
50TH ST SELLING
YORK SELLING
VERNON SELLING
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
Vendor
Explanation
122600
5101.4413
85.20
ART CENTER REVENUES
10363
HANDBOOK
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
464.65
10364
42036204
5822.5515
217196
1/5/01
100724
NISSEN, DICK
100.00
POLICE SERVICE
100.00
217197
1/5/01
102260
NORMAN, MIKE
48.75
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
48.75
217198
1/5/01
100929
NORTH STAR ICE
30.55
42.00
3.50-
46.94
115.99
217199
115/01
102652
NORTHLAND CHEMICAL
CORP.
174.63
ODOR SPRAY, SOAP
174.63
,
217200
1/5/01
100936
OLSEN COMPANIES
7.40
LATCH REPAIR KIT
174.66
SHEAVE
251.66
REPAIR PARTS
47.84
REPAIR PARTS
481.56
217201
1/5/01
101484
OSWALD HOSE & ADAPTERS
926.55
HOSE FOR JET MACHINE
926.55
217202
1/5/01
104002
PARTEK SUPPLY INC.
149.10
SILT FENCE
149.10
217203
1/5101
102440
PASS, GRACE
57.85
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
57.85
CITY OF Eu. -%
Council Check Register
1/5/01 --1/5101
PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description
10318 0777074 1470.6405 BOOKS & PAMPHLETS
115/01 .3:05:10
Page - 15
Business Unit
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10470
010201
1419.6102
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
RESERVE PROGRAM
10255
122600
5101.4413
ARTWORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
10361
42036207
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10362
44035804
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10363
42036205
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
10364
42036204
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
10419 050133 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10137 64308
10138 64437
10319 65172
10320 65173
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10420 100690 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10321 2681 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10257 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
DISTRIBUTION
MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
ART CENTER REVENUES
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation
217204 1/5/01 103999 PAUL, DODIE
156.00 ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
156.00
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 - 1/5/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10256 122600
Account No Account Description
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 16
Business Unit
ART CENTER REVENUES
217205 1/5/01
100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY
281.32
-
10365
59965177
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
281.32
217206 1/5/01
100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
1,204.11
10169
677597
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
137.90
10170
677786
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
244.25
10171
677783
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
150.09
10172
677598
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
100.06
10173
677773
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
165.50
10174
677770
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
720.40
10208
677771
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
277.06
10209
677830
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
138.38
10210
677797
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
3,750.33
10366
679386
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
1,857.32
10367
679382
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
150.33-
10368
3229879
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
549.73
10407
679385
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
180.98
10448
679383
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
397.66
10449
680143
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
3,464.72
10450
679384
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
526.48
10451
679142
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
82.08
10452
679145
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
20.90
10453
679144
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
6.665.22
10454
679143
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
20,482.84
217207 1/5/01
102763 PHILLIPS, LINDA
87.75
-87.75
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10258
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
217208 1/5/01
102156 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING
1,474.42
10369
38310
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
200.25
10370
38297
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
188.42
10371
38296
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
73.98
10372
38411
5840.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
120.51
10408
38458
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
•
CITY OF EDINA
1/5101 13:05:10
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Council Check Register
Page - 17
1/5/01 - 1/5/01
Check # Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation PO # Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
391.18
10409
38457
5862.5515
-COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
.60
BOX MATCHES 10455
38442
5822.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
50TH ST SELLING
300.90
10456
38441
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
2,750.26
217209 1/5/01
100956 PIPE SERVICES CORP
510.00
TV SEWER 10333
2000086
5923.6136
PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER
COLLECTION SYSTEMS
510.00
217210 1/5101
100961 POSTMASTER
3,000.00
POSTAGE FOR VISION 20/20 10322
122700
2210.6235
POSTAGE
COMMUNICATIONS
3,000.00
217211 115/01
-
100961 POSTMASTER
300.00
NEWSLETTER POSTAGE 10477
010201
1628.6235
POSTAGE
SENIOR CITIZENS
300.00
217212 1/5/01
100968 PRIOR WINE COMPANY
'
144.00
10175
317159
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
226.10
10176
317160
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
210.10
10211
317706
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
70.70
10212
317695
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE"
VERNON SELLING
2,057.91
10213
31.8194
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
60.20
10214
317702
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
_
1,267.38
10373
318197
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
177.99
10374
318195
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
4.214.38
217213 1/5/01
100971 QUALITY WINE
11.04
10215
912769 -00
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
3,962.44-
10216
915346 -00
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
39,27-
10216
915346 -00
5860.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
6,622.39
10217
915136 -00
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
131.56 -
10217
915136 -00
5840.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
3,640.45
10218
915347 -00
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
36.01-
10218
915347 -00
5840.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
913,81
10219
915137 -00
5822.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
50TH ST SELLING
18.16-
10219
915137 -00
5820.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
50TH STREET GENERAL
1,911,26
10220
915094 -00
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
18.91_
10220
915094 -00
5820.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
50TH STREET GENERAL
3,970.15
10221
915145 -00
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
115/01 13:05:10
Council Check Register
Page - 18
1/5/01 --115101
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation
PO # Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
78.88-
10221
915145 -00
5860.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
300.00-
10375
913946 -00
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
44.78-
10376
909401 -00
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
1,674.00
10377
916137 -00
5842.5513.
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
16.48-
10377
916137 -00
5840.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
985.00
10457
916235 -00
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
9.85-
-
10457
916235 -00
5840.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
22,996.64
217214
1/5/01
101965
QWEST
59.32
10139
121900
1550.6188
TELEPHONE
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
59.32
217215
1/5/01
102277
RASKIN, PHIL A.
26.00
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10259
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
26.00
217216
1/5/01
104007
RESCUE RESPONSE GEAR
151.40
KEVLAR ROPE
10323
2330
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
151.40
217217
1/5/01
104008
RESCUE SOURCE
416.05
TRAINING VIDEOS
10324
32711
1470.6579
TRAINING AIDS
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
416.05
217218
1/5/01
101901
RESCUE SYSTEMS INC
980.00
RESCUE ROPE
10325
27771
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
980.00
217219
1/5/01
104009
RIGGING FOR RESCUE
900.00
BELAY DEVICES
10326
1396R
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
900.00
217220
1/5/01
103269
S.H. BARTLETT CO INC
364.20
SOLENOID, SENSOR REPAIR KIT 10327
4071
1646.6530
REPAIR PARTS
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
364.20
217221
1/5/01
100987
SA -AG INC
1,976.98
CONCRETE SAND
10140
12973
1318.6517
SAND GRAVEL & ROCK
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
573.38
CONCRETE SAND
10141
13042
1318.6517
SAND GRAVEL & ROCK
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
373.95
CONCRETE SAND
10142
12992
1318.6517
SAND GRAVEL & ROCK
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA 1/5/01 13:05:10
Council Check Register Page - 19
1/5/01 – 1/5101
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit
- -- -- - -- 2.924.31 --
217222 1/5/01 104017 SCHROEDER, CARL
18500 PAID WATER BILL TWICE 10462 122700 5900.1211.1 ACCTS RECEIVABLE MANUAL UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
10478 45970516 5420.6250 ALARM SERVICE CLUB HOUSE
10260
122600
- — 185.00
ARTWORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
10421
217223
1/5/01
PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER
102352
SECURITY LINK FROM AMERITECH
676.38
ALARM SERVICE - 3 MONTHS
676.38
217224
1/5/01
102870
SEIFERT, ELIZABETH
31.20
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
31.20
217225
1/5/01
101106
SERVICEMASTER
884.75
BASEMENT CLEANUP
884.75
217226
1/5101
101380
SHAUGHNESY, SANDRA
78.00
-
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
78.00
217227
1/5/01
100834
SHEPARD, JOHN
100.00
POLICE SERVICE
100.00
217228
1/5/01
100998
SHERWIN WILLIAMS
46.44
PAINT
46.44
217229
1/5/01
100301
SIMPLOT PARTNERS
996.84
GRASS SEED
996.84
217230
1/5/01
104010
SIMULAIDS INC.
154.43
STRETCHERS
154.43
217231
1/5/01
103149
SMITH, PAM
147.75
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
147.75
10478 45970516 5420.6250 ALARM SERVICE CLUB HOUSE
10260
122600
5101.4413
ARTWORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
10421
2602
5923.6136
PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER
COLLECTION SYSTEMS
10261
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
10469
010201
1419.6102
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
RESERVE PROGRAM
10143 4675 -4 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10328 131586SI 1643.6547 SEED
10329 64549 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES
10262 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
STREET NAME SIGNS
GENERAL TURF CARE
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
ART CENTER REVENUES
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
115/01 - 1/5101
Check #
Date
Amount
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
Vendor
Explanation
217232
1/5/01
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
104000
SNOW CATS
115178
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
39.00
10459
411236
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
39.00
217233
1/5/01
101002
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS
INC
150.10
6,079.20
36.60
412.50
-
6,678.40
217234
1/5/01
102036
SPRINGSTED
1,261.65
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
1,261.65
217235
1/5/01
102390
STRAND MANUFACTURING CO INC
76.57
-
PANEL SKIRTS
76.57
217236
1/5/01
101015
STREICHERS
69.17
MEASURE WHEEL
69.17
217237
1/5/01
101017
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
1,845.23
PANEL & LAMP REPAIR
1,845.23
217238
1/5/01
100900
SUN NEWSPAPERS
148.41
ADVERTISING
148.42
ADVERTISING
148.42
ADVERTISING
445.25
217239
1/5/01
102510
SUNDIN, ROSALIE
74.75
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
74.75
217240
115/01
100794
SWANSON, HAROLD
100.00
POLICE SERVICE
100.00
PO # Doc No Inv No
10263 122600
Account No Account Description
5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 20
Business Unit
ART CENTER REVENUES
10378
115187
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10379
115186
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10458
115178
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
10459
411236
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10330 S3006.E1 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
10144 23606 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10331 199033.1 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10332 CVCB386052 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10145 385389 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
10145 385389 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
10145 385389 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
10264 122600 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
COLLECTION SYSTEMS
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
50TH ST SELLING
YORK SELLING
VERNON SELLING
ART CENTER REVENUES
10468 010201 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
1/5/01 13:05:10
Council Check Register
Page - 21
1/5/01 - 1/5/01
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor Explanation
PO # Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
217241
1/5/01
104011
TALICO INC.
486.25
— -
TRAINING MATERIAL
10334
4314
1470.6579
TRAINING AIDS
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
486.25
217242
1/5/01
100306
THOMAS, JAMIE
57.20
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10265
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
-- <- 57.20
217243
1/5101
101526
THOMPSON, BETTY
13.65
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10266
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
13.65
217244
1/5/01
- 101035
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
5,057.20
- -
10177
214029
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER.
VERNON SELLING . .
183.30
10178
214030
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
36.30
10410
214544
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
5.500.20
-
10411
214543
5862.5514
' COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
10,777.00
217245
1/5/01
101038
TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY
_89.10
GLOVES
10146
364020
5913.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
DISTRIBUTION
89.10
217246
1/5/01
103152
TOMLINSON, DAWN
64.94
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10267
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
64.94
217247
1/5101
103153
TREUTING, KRISTEN,
.185.58
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10268
122600
5101.4413
ART WORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
185.58
217248
115/01
101047
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO
2,970.00
--
AUTO- REVERSE DOORS
10335
112571
1552.6530
REPAIR PARTS
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
2,970.00
217249
1/5101
100363
U S BANCORP
172.92
PURCHASE FROM BRIGHT GUY 10337
122700
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
172.92
217250
1/5/01
102746
- UNITED STATES MECHANICAL INC
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 - 1/5/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description
425.96 CONTRACT REPAIRS 10336 7094.01 1646.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS
1/5/01 13:05:10
Page - 22 -.
Business Unit
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
425.96
217251
1/5/01
101055
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
405.00
WINTER MUNICI -PALS WORKSHOP
10480
122800
1550.6104
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
405.00
217252
1/5/01
103590
VALLEY -RICH CO. INC.
5,856.02
REPAIR WATER MAIN
10338
3626
5913.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
DISTRIBUTION
5,856.02
217253
1/5/01
101058
VAN PAPER CO.
63.37-
CREDIT
10147
350992
1551.6512
PAPER SUPPLIES
CITY HALL GENERAL
-
515.99
- - --
GARBAGE BAGS
10339
350885
1645.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
LITTER REMOVAL
452.62
217254
1/5/01
102970
VERIZON WIRELESS BELLEVUE
132.82
10422
121000
1495.6188
TELEPHONE
INSPECTIONS
5.67
10422
121000
1490.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
PUBLIC HEALTH
204.57
10422
121000
1470.6188
TELEPHONE
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
76.50
16422
121000
1120.6188
TELEPHONE
ADMINISTRATION
61.68
10422
121000
2210.6188
TELEPHONE
COMMUNICATIONS
81.30
10422
121000
1600.6188
TELEPHONE
PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
123.74
PARK MAINTENANCE
10422
121000
1640.6188
TELEPHONE
PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL
7.81
PARK PORTABLE
10422
121000
1640.6188
TELEPHONE
PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL
10.22
10422
121000
5420.6188
TELEPHONE
CLUB HOUSE
150.27
10422
121000
5913.6188
TELEPHONE
DISTRIBUTION
194.74
10422
121000
1260.6188
TELEPHONE
ENGINEERING GENERAL
171.42
10422
121000
1280.6188
TELEPHONE
SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD
1,220.74
217255
1/5/01
101066
VIKING ELECTRIC
842.06
STREET LIGHTING
10148
5530976
1322.6530
REPAIR PARTS
STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
842.06
217256
1/5/01
101067
VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER
240.00
-
ESKIMO MITTS
10149
76933
5913.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
DISTRIBUTION
240.00
217257
1/5/01
102958
WALSH, CARE
32.50
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
10269
122600
5101.4413
ARTWORK SOLD
ART CENTER REVENUES
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
-- _ -_
Date
-
Amount
Vendor
Explanation
10180
267.38
32.50
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
217258
1/5/01
5842.5513
101080 WALSH, WILLIAM
79.19
10380
052742
100.00
1,053.40
--
POLICE SERVICE
10381
052743
100.00
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
217262
217259
1/5/01
100591 WITTSTRUCK, MARTHA
101077 WEST WELD SUPPLY CO.
YORK SELLING
58.50
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
292.46
DRILL BITS, POINT TAPS
217263
292.46
101086 WORLD CLASS WINES INC
217260
1/5/01
725.00
101033 WINE COMPANY, THE
875.00
456.00
931.00
264.00
2,531.00
217264
329.60
101087 WROBLESKI, HENRY
670.65
POLICE SERVICE
217261
1/5/01
5862.5513
101312 WINE MERCHANTS
VERNON SELLING
10180
267.38
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
.69-
052419
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
79.19
10380
052742
5862.5513
1,053.40
--
VERNON SELLING
10381
052743
1,399.28
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
217262
1/5/01
052744
100591 WITTSTRUCK, MARTHA
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
58.50
ARTWORK SOLD AT EAC
58.50
217263
1/5/01
101086 WORLD CLASS WINES INC
725.00
875.00
931.00
2,531.00
217264
1/5/01
101087 WROBLESKI, HENRY
100.00
POLICE SERVICE
100.00
217265
1/5/01
101091 ZIEGLER INC
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/5/01 - 1/5/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10467 010201
1/5/01 .3:05:10
Page - 23
Account No Account Description Business Unit
1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM
10341 36417 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10179
052417
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10180
052503
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10222
052419
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10380
052742
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10381
052743
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10412
052744
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10382 37987
10383 12018
10460 37986
10461 37943
10270 122600
10223 101710
10384 101706
10385 101708
10472 010201
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES
5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
1/5/01 13:05:10
Council Check Register
Page - 24
1/5/01 — 1/5/01
Check # Date Amount
Vendor Explanation
PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description
Business Unit
485.62
-'-
CUTTING EDGES, BOLTS, NUTS 10342 PC000374529 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
485.62
217266 1/5/01
100686 CITY OF EDINA PAYROLL ACCOUNT
390,000.00
115 payroll
10602 PAYROLL 9900.1010 CASH TREASURER'S
PAYROLL CLEARING
FUNDING
390,000.00
726,529.20
Grand Total
Payment Instrument Totals
Check Total 726,529.20
Total Payments 726,529.20
Manager
R55CKSUM3 Vers:
LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA 1/5/01 13:11:01
Council Check Summary Page - 1
Company
Amount
01000
GENERAL FUND
90,537.13
02200
COMMUNICATIONS FUND
3,061.68
04000
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
388.00
05100
ART CENTER FUND
4,399.95
05400 -
GOLF COURSE FUND
7,786.15
05800
LIQUOR FUND
210,059.24
05900'
UTILITY FUND
20,297.05
09900
PAYROLL FUND
390,000.00
726.529.20
We confirm to the best of our knowledge
and belief, that these claims
comply in all material respects
with the rewiremsnte of the City
of Edina pug and
procedures
Manager
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
Vendor
Explanation
217267
1/11/01
REPAIR PARTS
100616
ACTION MAILING SERVICES
INC.
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
379.78
RUBBISH REMOVAL
10766
MAIL PROCESS
1481.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
379.78
010101
5511.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
217268
1111/01
102191
ADVANCED GRAPHIC SYSTEMS INC.
74.44
TONER FOR PRINTERS
622.87
PRINTER CARTRIDGES
697.31
217269
1/11/01
102626
AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES
1,836.82
CLASS II ROCK
1,836.82
217270
1/11/01
102609
ALL SAINTS BRANDS
507.85
507.85
217271
1/11/01
100624
ALTERNATOR REBUILD CO.
66.63
REGULATOR
340.80
STARTER, ALTERNATOR
407.43
217272
1/11/01
104033
AMEN, JULIE
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 -1/12/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10643 87293
28.00 SKATING LESSON REFUND
28.00
217273 1/11101 101977 ARCH PAGING
8.91 PAGER FOR VINCE
8.91
217274 1/11/01 100375 ASPEN ENVIRONMENTAL
150.11 SANITATION
150.11
217275 1/11/01 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS
144.43
339.91
339.92
97.57
22.23
529.84
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 1
Account No Account Description Business Unit
5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING)
10612 INV00032208 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10613 INV00032190 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10826 1626214 5913.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
DISTRIBUTION
10563
00032802
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
10486
31788
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10487
31769
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10756
010501
5610.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ED ADMINISTRATION
10488
K3749609A
1640.6188
TELEPHONE
PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL
10832 15684 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL
10766
010101
1551.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
10766
010101
1301.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
10766
010101
1552.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
10766
010101
1470.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
10766
010101
1481.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
10766
010101
5511.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
CITY HALL GENERAL
GENERAL MAINTENANCE
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
YORK FIRE STATION
ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS
R55CKREG3 LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/10/01 12:08:32
Council Check Register Page - 2
1/11101 - 1/12101
Check # Date Amount
44.50
60.49
200.50
44.49
71.45
721.83
77.49
68.48
23.99
50.50
2,837.62
Vendor Explanation
217276 1/11/01 102928 ASSOC OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPA
9,385.00 2001 DUES
9,385.00
217277 1/11/01 100672 BCAITRAINING & DEVELOPMENT SEC
180.00 CONT. ED.
120.00 CONT. ED.
180.00 CONT. ED.
480.00
217278 1/11/01 102009 BEER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
34.00 LINE CLEANING
34.00
217279 1/11/01
101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION
846.35
RUBBISH REMOVAL
252.00
RUBBISH REMOVAL
1.098.35
RUBBISH REMOVAL
217280 1111/01
100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS
67.05
OFFICE SUPPLIES
30.16
PENS
321.76
OFFICE SUPPLIES
59.55
OFFICE SUPPLIES
115.98
OFFICE SUPPLIES
248.84
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PO # Doc No Inv No
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10766 010101
10770 804
10624 T009970
10625 T009949
10626 T009966
10833 4184
10564 20472700
10565 20473100
10489 8336690
10490 8341600
10614 8335970
10615 R330990
10616 S007622
10617 8315700
Account No Account Description
5422.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
1645.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
5420.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
5111.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
1645.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
5311.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
5620.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
5861.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
5841.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
5821.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
1645.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
5430.6182
RUBBISH REMOVAL
1120.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
Business Unit
GOLF DOME PROGRAM
MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
LITTER REMOVAL
CLUB HOUSE
ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT
LITTER REMOVAL
POOL OPERATION
EDINBOROUGH PARK
VERNON OCCUPANCY
YORK OCCUPANCY
50TH ST OCCUPANCY
LITTER REMOVAL
RICHARDS GOLF COURSE
ADMINISTRATION
1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
5421.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL
5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
5510.6513
OFFICE SUPPLIES
1552.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1400.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1400.6513
OFFICE SUPPLIES
1400.6513
OFFICE SUPPLIES
1400.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
ARENA ADMINISTRATION
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EUINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 --1/12/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description
10491 MN- 126179 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10492 0080404178 5125.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES
10493 02021694 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 3
Business Unit
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
MEDIA STUDIO
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10652 222648 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10653 223646 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10654 224741 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10817
34369
843.34
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
— -
217281
1/11/01
5120.5510
100650
BEST ACCESS SYSTEMS OF MINNESO
10627
01910657
15.84
GENERAL SUPPLIES
KEYS
15.84
217282
1/11/01
100649
BEST BUY COMPANY INC.
236.07
CRAFT SUPPLIES
236.07
217283
1/11/01
-
103832
BLACK & DECKER USPTG
202.07
CHARGER, BATTERY PACK
202.07
217284
1/11/01
100659
BOYER TRUCK PARTS
69.54
DASH PARTS
319.89
BRACKET, PINS
45.80
KIT RADIO
435.23
217285
1/11/01
103919
BRAEMAR MAILING SERVICE
340.44
FOUNDATION MAILING COSTS
340.44
217286
1/11/01
102302
BRANDESS KALT AETNA GROUP INC.
112.65
SETS OF RETOUCHING
112.65-
217287
1111/01
101430
BROWNELLS INC.
39.34
TETRA ACTION GUNS
39.34
217288
1/11/01
100058
BROWNING FERRIS INDUSTRIES OF
37,935.20
RECYCLING
37,935.20
217289
1/11/01
100669
BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC.
357.80
ROCK
357.80
10491 MN- 126179 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10492 0080404178 5125.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES
10493 02021694 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 3
Business Unit
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
MEDIA STUDIO
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10652 222648 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10653 223646 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10654 224741 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10817
34369
2210.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
COMMUNICATIONS
10494
876029
5120.5510
COST OF GOODS SOLD
ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI
10627
01910657
1400.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10819 7000078 -1200 5952.6183 RECYCLING CHARGES
0 -0500
10495 362776 5913.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK
RECYCLING
DISTRIBUTION
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 --1/12/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10771 122800
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation
217290
1/11/01
103905
CALLAS, TOM
109.00
SEMINAR & EXAM,FEES
109.00
217291
1/11/01
100677
CARGILL INC.
3,150.80
ICE CONTROL
10,018.08
ICE CONTROL
13,168.88
217292
1/11/01
100681
CATCO
472.62
PUMP
184.09
MOTOR
817.73
MULTIFASTERS '
166.27
COUPLERS, FITTINGS
1,640.71'
217293
1/11/01
104040
CGI COMMUNICATIONS INC.
250.00
CITY MAP ADVERTISING
250.00
CITY MAP ADVERTISING
595.00
CITY MAP ADVERTISING
1,095.00
217294
1111/01
100689
CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIP.
40.50
CYLINDER LATCHES
217.00
HOOLIGAN TOOL
257.50
217295
1/11/01
101345
COLOURS
5,532.36
VISION 20/20 BOOK DESIGN
5,532.36
_
217296
1/11/01
100693
COMMERCIAL FURNITURE BROKERS
239.63
REMODELING
32.40
REMODELING
272.03
217297
1/11/01
101323
CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS
51.27
SAFETY.EQUIPMENT
244.53
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
81.61
EYE WASH, BURN GEL
377.41
10790 21750292
10791 21749518
10655' ' 6 -69388
10656 3 -48416
10657 3 -48309
10658 3 -48651
10805 1
10806 2
10807 3
10811 27347
10812 26998
10837 7817
10648 00719353
10649 00072955
10496 01423238
10496 01423238
10659 01421473
1110101 12:08:32
Page - 4
Account No Account Description Business Unit
5610.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ED ADMINISTRATION
1318.6525 SALT
1318.6525 SALT
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
VERNON SELLING
50TH ST SELLING
YORK SELLING
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS
4452.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CITY HALL
4452.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CITY HALL
5911.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT
1552.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT
1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT
PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
GENERAL.MAINTENANCE
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 -1112/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No
217298 1/11/01 100695 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO.
450.57 PORCELAIN, EARTHENWARE 10835 043163
Account No Account Description
5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD
10497 0186907 1260.6548 BLUE PRINTING
10498 0187018 1260.6548 BLUE PRINTING
10809 122600 1470.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
10630 2000 LEASE 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL
10499 36148901 1400.6575 PRINTING
10500 1198281
10813 337432
10814 338324
10815 338052
10618 01412
10684 120608
10685 120409
10686 120410
10687 120609
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 5
Business Unit
ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI
ENGINEERING GENERAL
ENGINEERING GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT, GENERAL
5100.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET
1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
450.57
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
217299
1/11/01
50TH ST SELLING
100698
COPY EQUIPMENT INC.
YORK SELLING
119.75
SEPIA MYLAR PAPER
15.34
BLUELINE PAPER
135.09
217300
1/11/01
104041
COUNTERS, CAMERON
157.25
WORK BOOTS
157.25
217301
1111/01
104028
CROTEAU, JOYCE
10,007.79
ANNUAL RADIO LEASE
10.007.79
217302
1/11101
100700
CURTIS 1000
273.65
ENVELOPES
273.65
217303
1/11101
104020
DALCO
2,711.22
AUTO SCRUBBER
2,711.22
217304
1/11/01
101390
DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO.
110.76
E -81 NOZZLE MOUNT
23.07
MIC. HOLDERS
123.02
BAFFELS
256.85
217305
1/11/01
103182
DAVIS & STANTON
95.00
COMMENDATION BARS
95.00
217306
1/11/01
102478
DAY DISTRIBUTING
946.30
324.80
18.40
557.65
Account No Account Description
5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD
10497 0186907 1260.6548 BLUE PRINTING
10498 0187018 1260.6548 BLUE PRINTING
10809 122600 1470.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
10630 2000 LEASE 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL
10499 36148901 1400.6575 PRINTING
10500 1198281
10813 337432
10814 338324
10815 338052
10618 01412
10684 120608
10685 120409
10686 120410
10687 120609
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 5
Business Unit
ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI
ENGINEERING GENERAL
ENGINEERING GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT, GENERAL
5100.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET
1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/10/01 12:08:32
Council Check Register Page - 6
1/11101 -- 1/12/01
Check # Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation PO #
Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
18.40
10688
120607
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
1,865.55
217307 1/11/01
102712 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
151.22
10501
W00110643
1622.6188
TELEPHONE
SKATING & HOCKEY
16.59
10501
W00110643
2210.6188
TELEPHONE
COMMUNICATIONS
60.16
10501
W00110643
5821.6188
TELEPHONE
50TH ST OCCUPANCY
90.24
10501
W00110643
5841.6188
TELEPHONE
YORK OCCUPANCY
60.16
10501
W00110643
5861.6188
TELEPHONE
VERNON OCCUPANCY
45.20
HISTORICAL
10501
W00110643
1646.6188
TELEPHONE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
15.04
ARNESON
10501
W00110643
1646.6188
TELEPHONE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
15.04
GREENHOUSE
10501
W00110643
1646.6188
TELEPHONE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
29.22
CARD ACCESS -PARKS
10501
W00110643
1646.6188
TELEPHONE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
30.08
10501
W00110643
1628.6188
TELEPHONE
SENIOR CITIZENS
15.88
10501
W00110643
5311.6188
TELEPHONE
POOL OPERATION
89.81
10501
W00110643
1481.6188
TELEPHONE
YORK FIRE STATION
75.20
10501
W00110643
1550.6188
TELEPHONE
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
97.44
10501
W00110643
5111.6188
TELEPHONE
ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT
240.81
10501
W00110643
5610.6188
TELEPHONE
ED ADMINISTRATION
14.61
10501
W00110643
5511.6188
TELEPHONE
ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS
51.48
10501
W00110643
5210.6188
TELEPHONE
GOLF DOME PROGRAM
93.03
PHONE LINES
10834
W00110650
5420.6188
TELEPHONE
CLUB HOUSE
1,191.21
217308 1/11/01
101675 DESHLER, BRANDON
159.00
REIMBURSE RENTAL PHONE CHGS
10621
122200
1400.6151
EQUIPMENT RENTAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
159.00
217309 1/11/01
101644 DICK BUCK COMPANY
138.02
CRAFT SUPPLIES
10502
38748
5110.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
31.92
CRAFT SUPPLIES
10503
38749
5110.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
169.94
217310 1/11/01
100730 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP
10,849.30
LEGAL
10642
837449
1195.6131
PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL
LEGAL SERVICES
10,849.30
217311 1/11/01
100739 EAGLE WINE
123.50
10689
321429
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
1,037.08
10690
321428
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
494.52
10691
321418
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF ED11vA 1/10/01 12:08:32
Council Check Register Page - 7
1/11/01 — 1/12/01
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation
PO # Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
1,655.10
217312
1/11/01
100741
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
2,241.15
10692
731665
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
2,987.95
10693
731939
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
1,543.55
10694
730786
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
6,772.65
217313
1/11/01
100742
ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION DIVISI
106.29
SPRAY FOR BUGS
10789
7308297
5620.6230
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK
106.29
217314
1/11101
103261
EDINA CLEANERS
16.45
CLEAN TABLE LINENS
10504
169530
5620.6201
LAUNDRY
EDINBOROUGH PARK
16.45
217315
1/11/01
101476
EVERGREEN LAND SERVICES
260.00
PROJECT MANAGER
10505
00 -1704
01315.1705.2000NSULTING DESIGN
BA -315 TH 100 & 77TH ST GEOME'
260.00
217316
1/11/01
100018
EXPERT T BILLING
3,230.00
DEC. 2000 BILLS
10821
010501
1470.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
3,230.00
217317
1/11/01
100756
FEDERAL EXPRESS
30.26
TRANSPORTATION
10619
5- 658 -66659
1400.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
30.26
217318
1/11/01
104035
FISHER, SYRILLE H.
474.00
AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT
10758
010501
1001.4329
AMBULANCE FEES
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
474.00
217319
1/11/01
100760
FOWLER ELECTRIC
101.37
STARTER ASSEMBLY
10660
56554200
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
101.37
217320
1/11/01
101022
FRAME, SUSAN
450.00
TEACHING AC
10799
010501
5110.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
260.00
CRAFT SUPPLIES
10799
010501
5110.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
710.00
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11101 —1/12/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No
_._ -- - - - - - -. - . -._... -- - - --
217321 1/11101 102432 FREEWAY RADIATOR SERVICE
65.00 RADIATOR REPAIR 10661 28197
Account No Account Description
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 8
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10775
3082656
65.00
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
10776
217322
1/11/01
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
102076
G 8 K SERVICES
V526899
1553.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
132.80
UNIFORMS
198.64
UNIFORMS
331.44
217323
1/11/01
100016
GASBOY INTERNATIONAL
INC
_..
99.00
....99.00
RENEWAL AGREEMENT
217324
1/11/01
100025
GOLDEN SHOE STABLES
550.00
HORSE TROLLEY RIDES 1 -21 -01
550.00
217325
1/11/01
101679
GOLFCRAFT
435.00
GOLF CLUBS
290.00
GOLF CLUBS
725.00
217326
1111/01
101103
GRAINGER
133.34
FAN, CLOCK, HEX KEY
133.34
217327
1/11101
102217
GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC
1,175.63
1,175.63
217328
1/11101
104036
GRAUL, GRETCHEN
81.76
AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT
81.76
217329
1/11/01
104038
GREINER, RHONDA
326.96
RING REPLACE- PROPERTY INV.
326.96
217330
1/11/01
100782
GRIGGS COOPER 8 CO.
103.35
-
75.70-
Account No Account Description
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 8
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10775
3082656
1646.6610
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
10776
3082655
1553.6610
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10769
V526899
1553.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10779 ,
010401
5610.6136
PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER
ED ADMINISTRATION
10506
14180
5440.5511
COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP
PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
10507
14184
5440.5511
COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP
PRO SHOP. RETAIL SALES
10508
498 - 283356 -0
5620.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
EDINBOROUGH PARK
10695
36238
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10759
010501
1001.4329
AMBULANCE FEES
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
10803 010301 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10566
319820
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10567
552258
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 –1/12101
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation
— — --
PO # Doc No
Inv No
42.95-
10568
552259
37.50-
10569
552145
48.70-
10570
552260
36.23-
10571
552261
1,882.08
10696
321421
4,061.20
10697
318803
2,890.00
10698
321121
1,219.94
10699
321430
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 9
Account No
Account Description
9,915.49
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
217331
1111/01
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
102306
H.U.G.
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
80.00
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
2001 MEMBERSHIP
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
80.00
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
217332
1/11/01
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
101387
HAPPY FACES
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
150.00
FACE PAINTING 1 -21 -01
150.00
217333
1/11/01
102312
HARMON INC.
361.54
FLUSH BOLTS, RUBBER ENDS
361.54
217334
1111/01
100795
HARRIS HOMEYER CO.
23,967.00
INSURANCE
16,569.00
INSURANCE
40,536.00
217335
1/11101
101215
HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFI
1,140.63
OCTOBER BOOKING FEE
1,476.46
NOVEMBER BOOKING FEE
2,617.09
217336
1/11/01
100801
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
1,662.94
NOV. ROOM & BOARD
1,662.94
217337
1/11/01
101808
HENNEPIN SOUTH SERVICES COLLAR
5,304.50
4TH QTR FUNDING
5,304.50
217338
1/11101
101588
HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 9
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10765 010401 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10780 010401 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION
10822 2326374 -000 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10784 19599 1550.6200 INSURANCE
10785 19600 15 50.6200 INSURANCE
10628 103100 1195.6170 COURT CHARGES
10629 113000 1195.6170 COURT CHARGES
EDINBOROUGH PARK
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
LEGAL SERVICES
LEGAL SERVICES
10631 002977 1195.6225 BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES
10647 122200 1508.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RPC
R55CKREG3 LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 - 1/12/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No
120.00 VEHICLE RECERTIFICATION 10797 5 -1953
120.00
217339 1/11/01 100417 HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY
131.44 POOL CHEMICALS 10509 0122010
131.44
217340 1/11/01 100842 HOUSEHOLD BANK F.S.B. (KNOX)
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 10
Account No Account Description Business Unit
1281.6104 CONFERENCES 8, SCHOOLS TRAINING
5620.6545 CHEMICALS
90.76 SEALER, BRUSHES 10510 0217 - 451107 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
90.76
217341 1/11/01 101910 HTE INC.
EDINBOROUGH PARK
ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS
125.00
COPS GRANT - MDB
10603
800891
4606.6710
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COPS MORE GRANT
1,826.55
COPS GRANT - MDB
10604
564898
4606.6710
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COPS MORE GRANT
7,680.00
COPS GRANT - MDB
10605
564779
4606.6710
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COPS MORE GRANT
125.00
COPS GRANT - MDB
10606
564509
4606.6710
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COPS MORE GRANT
375.00
COPS - FIELD REPORT
10607
563555
4606.6710
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COPS MORE GRANT
175.01
SERV. CONTRACT -ALARM BILL
10608
557808
1400.6230
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTPOLICE DEPT. GENERAL
1,625.00
COPS - FIELD REPORT
10609
558765
4606.6710
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COPS MORE GRANT
717.63
COPS - FIELD REPORT BALANCE
10610
550928 -MB
4606.6710
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COPS MORE GRANT
12,649.19
217342 1111/01
102114 HUEBSCH
62.82
TOWELS, LINENS
10511
267405
5620.6230
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK
10.50
TOWELS, LINENS
10512
263160
5620.6230
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK
52.99
TOWELS, LINENS
10788
271620
5620.6230
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK
126.31
217343 1/11/01
100811 HYDRO SUPPLY CO
170.40-
WATER METER
9555
0017869 -CM
5900.1357
INVENTORY WATER METER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
154.96
WATER READER ANTENNA
9556
0017884 -IN
5900.1357
INVENTORY WATER METER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
44,767.29
WATER METERS
10513
0018000 -IN
5900.1357
INVENTORY WATER METER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
44,751.85
217344 1/11/01
100031 1 -494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION
4,727.40
2001 DUES
10763
010101
1500.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES
4,727.40
217345 1/11/01
101403 J -CRAFT INC.
1,024.07
TOOLS
10663
26283
1301.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE
1,024.07
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
1/10/01 12:08:32
Council Check Register
Page - 11
1/11101 --1/12/01
Check # Date
Amount
Vendor Explanation
PO # Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
217346 1/11/01
101612 JACK RICHESON & CO. INC.
264.38
PALETTES, BRUSHES
10514
0185959 -IN
5120.5510
COST OF GOODS SOLD
ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI
264.38
217347 1111/01
100828 JERRYS FOODS
-
50.40
10515
122100
1550.6121
ADVERTISING PERSONNEL
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
114.94
10515
122100
1180.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
ELECTION
9.01
10515
122100
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
14.13
10515
122100
1622.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
SKATING & HOCKEY
208.29
10515
122100
5110.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
7.25
10515
122100
5421.6511
CLEANING SUPPLIES
GRILL
87.90
10515
122100
5421.5510
COST OF GOODS SOLD
GRILL
218.30
10515
122100
1629.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
ADAPTIVE RECREATION
29.00
10515
122100
1400.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
249.92
10515
122100
1400.6106
MEETING EXPENSE
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
989.14
217348 1/11/01
100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE
47.82
10611
123100
1551.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CITY HALL GENERAL
342.04
10611
123100
1301.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
GENERAL MAINTENANCE
12.77
10611
123100
1260.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
ENGINEERING GENERAL
76.88
10611
123100
4090.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
STREET REVOLVING
55.82
10611
123100
1400.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
134.20
10611
. 123100
1470.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
50.10
10611
123100
1322.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
3:31
10611
123100
1490.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
PUBLIC HEALTH
7.90
10611
123100
1495.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
INSPECTIONS
102.12
10611
123100
1552.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
92.64
10611
123100
1553.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
3.81
10611
123100
1622.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
SKATING & HOCKEY
247.32
10611
123100
1646.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
20.40
10611
123100
5420.6406.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CLUB HOUSE
11.36
10611
123100
5620.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
EDINBOROUGH PARK
245.88
10611
123100
5630.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CENTENNIAL LAKES
164.66
10611
123100
5911.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER
20.43
10611
123100
5860.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
1,639.46
217349 1/11101
100830 JERRY'S PRINTING
159.75
PRINT SALES RECEIPTS
10516
A -16650
5510.6575
PRINTING
ARENA ADMINISTRATION
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation
159.75
217350 1111/01 100832 JIM HATCH SALES
397.95 PUSHERS, PICK HANDLES
397.95
217351 1/11/01 101202 JIM LUPIENT'S HAROLD CHEVROLET
19.34 NIPPLES
19.34
217352 1/11/01 102546 JOHN'S AUTO PARTS
55.38 FENDER
55.38 -
217354 1/11/01 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO.
26.16-
5.84-
104.18-
47.79-
1,947.42
649.14
259.42-
2,180.45
649.14
90.39-
225.38
26.14-
32.69-
329.94
1,050.24
1,910.00
220.00
356.84
7,334.82
6,253.71
1,334.36
8,709.15
5,223.88
754.75
38,536.61
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 -1/12/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10517 1865
Account No Account Description
1301.6556 TOOLS
10664 79649CVW 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10665 02950905 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 12
Business Unit
GENERAL MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10572
144996
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10573
144997
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10574
144999
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10575
144998
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10576
1203772
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10577
1203773
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10578
144992
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10579
1203770
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10580
1203771
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10700
144993
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10701
1205439
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10702
144995
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10703
144994
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10704
1205444
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10705
1205436
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10706
1205442
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10707
1205441
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10708
1205438
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10709
1205437
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10710
1205443
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10711
1203264
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10712
1202600
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10713
1202597
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10714
1203701
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 -1/12/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10518 81010
Check #
Date
Amount
OFFICE SUPPLIES
Vendor
Explanation
217355
1111101
10800
100836
JOHNSON WHOLESALE FLORIST INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10800
96.01
5125.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
FLOWERS
122700
5860.6107
96.01
10646
122700
5860.6406
217356
1/11/01
10716
100919
JOHNSON, NAOMI
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
10717
16.14
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
OFFICE SUPPLIES
10718
143670
142.16
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
CRAFT SUPPLIES
28.20
MEDIA GENERAL SUPPLIES
56.78
MEDIA CRAFT SUPPLIES
243.28
217357
1/11/01
101514
KASPRICK, JOHN
21.75
PETTY CASH
6.91
PETTY CASH
28.66
217358
1/11/01
104027
KEMP, TROY
21.25
AMMUNITION REIMBURSEMENT
21.25
217359
1/11/01
100944
KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC.
68.00
24.00 -
71.00-
29.95-
650.90
88.00
110.00
1,005.50
1,797.45
217360
1/11/01
101810
KLINGELHOETS, DON
240.90
CONFERENCE EXPENSES
240.90
217361
1/11/01
104021
KQRS, INC.
8,700.00
ADVERTISING
8,700.00
217362
1/11/01
100846
KUETHER DISTRIBUTING
CO
166.00
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 13
Account No Account Description Business Unit
5620.6620 TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS EDINBOROUGH PARK
10800
010401
5110.6513
OFFICE SUPPLIES
10800
010401
5110.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
10800
010401
5125.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10800
010401
5125.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
10646
122700
5860.6107
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE
10646
122700
5860.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10620 122200 1400.6551 AMMUNITION
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
MEDIA STUDIO
MEDIA STUDIO
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10581
143401
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10582
CM 1228
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10583
CM1220
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10584
CM1229
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10715
143608
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10716
143607
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
10717
143671
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10718
143670
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10519 122800 5410.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION
10520 127267
10719 287265
5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM
5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
GENERAL SUPPLIES
Vendor
Explanation
Account No
Account Description
36.00
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
517.20
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
14.15
733.35
217363
1/11/01
103257
LAND CARE EQUIPMENT CO.
46.98
VOLTAGE REGULATOR
46.98
217364
1/11/01
100605
LANDS' END CORPORATE SALES
291.67
LOGO SHIRTS
805.36
LOGO SHIRTS
504.17
LOGO SHIRTS
1,601.20
217365
1/11/01
103893
LANE, SHELBY
8.65
CONT. ED. (MEALS)
8.65
217366
1/11/01
104039
LAW & POLITICS MEDIA INC.
633.00
ADVERTISEMENT
633.00
217367
1/11/01
101433
LIMBECK, MARC
18.75
CONT. ED. (MEALS)
18.75
217368
1111/01
103526
LOFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEMS
207.68
COPIER USAGE- DEC.
207.68
217369
1/11/01
104045
LORTON DATA
245.38
BULK MAIL
245.38
217370
1/11/01
100580
LSI INC.
250.00
LOGIC SOFTWARE
250.00
217371
1/11/01
101165
M.A.A.O.
390.00
MEMBERSHIP DUES
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11101 - 1/12/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
10720 287373
10721 287418
10722 287417
10666 023514
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10796
01517300
1/10/01 12:08:32
GENERAL SUPPLIES
50TH ST SELLING
Page - 14
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10796
01517300
5822.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
50TH ST SELLING
10796
01517300
5842.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
YORK SELLING
10796
01517300
5862.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
VERNON SELLING
10623
122000
1400.6104
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10804 2079 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM
10622
122200
1400.6104
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10670
104607562
1280.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD
10840 55811 5110.6803 CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
10633 122100 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10782 010501 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 --1/12/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No
Account No Account Description
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 15
Business Unit
10829 2010641 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10585
233683
390.00
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING-
217372
1/11/01
5862.5515
100864
MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC.
10587
233682
288.42
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
BEARING, NOZZLE
10588
233684
288.42
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
217373
'1/11/01
5842.5514
100868
MARK VII:SALES
10724
235603
95.75
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
32.70
3,647.25
24.60
2,433.40
47.20
"
6,280.90
217374
1/11/01
104043
MASTER CRAFT LABELS INC.
228.31
LABELS
228.31
217375
1/11101
101030
MATHISON CO.
138.79
GOUACHE, PAPER
138.79
217376
1/11/01
100871
MATT BULLOCK CONTRACTING CO. 1
813.75
CONTRACTOR SERVICES
813.75
217377
1/11/01
100875
MCCAREN DESIGNS INC.
609.60
FLOWERS, PLANTS
609.60
217378
1/11/01
103288
MEDICA PRIMARY
612.00
AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT
612.00
217379
1/11/01
101987
MENARDS
5.94
LIGHTS
5.94
217380
1/11101
101483
MENARDS' ACCT #30240251
119.66
SHOP SUPPLIES
Account No Account Description
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 15
Business Unit
10829 2010641 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10585
233683
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING-
10586
233685
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10587
233682
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING'
10588
233684
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
10723
235602
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
10724
235603
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10838
74253
5440.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
10521
433840 -0
5120.5510
COST OF GOODS SOLD
ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI
10667
1155
1301.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
GENERAL MAINTENANCE
10823 15065
10761 010501
10522 79826
10680 34264
5620.6620 TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS EDINBOROUGH PARK
1001.4329 AMBULANCE FEES
5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
EDINBOROUGH PARK
MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11101 -- 1/12/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No
10523 55453
10524 55360
10525 55476
10802 010301
Account No Account Description
5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES
5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES
1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 16
Business Unit
EDINBOROUGH PARK
EDINBOROUGH PARK
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
5900.1211.1 ACCTS RECEIVABLE MANUAL UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
10526
3476005
119.66
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
217381
1/11/01
5840.6406
100882
MERIT SUPPLY
10526
3476005
654.87
GENERAL
TOWELS, PADS, CLEANING SUPPLIE
10526
3476005
680.27
GENERAL
SOAP, CLEANING SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
756.95
GENERAL
BABY CHANGING STATIONS
10526
3476005
2,092.09
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
217382
1/11101
1646.6406
104037
MERRELL, STEVE
10526
3476005
166.64
GENERAL
PAYMENT MADE TWICE
10526
3476005
166.64
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
217383
1/11/01
1301.6406
100410
METROCALL
12.27
PAGER SERVICE
12.27
PAGER SERVICE
12.27
PAGER SERVICE
12.27
PAGER SERVICE
12.27
PAGER SERVICE
24.54
PAGER SERVICE
35.25
PAGER SERVICE
35.28
PAGER SERVICE
49.08
PAGER SERVICE
88.93
PAGER SERVICE
294.43
'
217384
1111/01
100887
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONME
230,627.07
SEWER SERVICE
230,627.07
217385
1/11101
104029
MIKE LARSON PLUMBING INC.
301.71
LEAK REPAIR
301.71
217386
1/11/01
100896
MINN COMM
491.55
PAGER SYSTEM
491.55
217387
1/11/01
101320
MINNEAPOLIS AREA ASSOC OF REAL
117.00
MEMBER SERVICES
117.00
10523 55453
10524 55360
10525 55476
10802 010301
Account No Account Description
5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES
5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES
1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 16
Business Unit
EDINBOROUGH PARK
EDINBOROUGH PARK
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
5900.1211.1 ACCTS RECEIVABLE MANUAL UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
10526
3476005
5860.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
5840.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
5111.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
1400.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
4090.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
1490.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
1646.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
5911.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
5420.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10526
3476005
1301.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
STREET REVOLVING
PUBLIC HEALTH
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
PUMP 8 LIFT STATION OPER
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL MAINTENANCE
10786
0000714330
5922.6302
SEWER SERVICE METRO
SEWER TREATMENT
10634
13316 -101
1400.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10777 30343001019 5620.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK
10798 1088899 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 - 1/12101
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No
217388 1/11/01 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT
8,820.06 WATER PURCHASE 10820 122900
10764 010401
Account No Account Description
5913.6601 WATER PURCHASED
1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
1110/01 12:08:32
Page - 17
Business Unit
DISTRIBUTION
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10527
LICENSE -PEST
8,820.06
LICENSES & PERMITS GENERAL TURF CARE
10528
217389
1111/01
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK
101684
MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASS
1646.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
150.00
010501
2001 RENEWAL
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10795
150.00
5820.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
217390
1/11/01
5111.6406
101912
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICU
10.00
PESTICIDE LICENSE RENEWAL
10.00
217391
1/11/01
100903
MINNESOTA ELEVATOR INC
78.50
DECEMBER SERVICE
78.50
217392
1/11/01
103260
MINNESOTA NURSERY & LANDSCAPE
90.00
LANDSCAPE SEMINAR
90.00
217393
1/11/01
101410
MINNESOTA STATE BOARD OF ELECT
275.00
MAINT. FEE & ELEC. PERMITS
275.00
MAINT. FEE & ELEC. PERMITS
275.00
MAINT. FEE & ELEC. PERMITS
275.00
MAINT. FEE & ELEC. PERMITS
100.00
MAINT. FEE & ELEC. PERMITS
100.00
MAINT. FEE & ELEC. PERMITS
1,300.00
217394
1/11/01
102552
MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION ALLIA
565.00
ANNUAL DUES
565.00
217395
1/11/01
101996
MINNESOTA TROPHIES & GIFTS
58.89
TROPHY
58.89
217396
1/11/01
101316
MMBA
3,333.34
MMBA DUES ASSESSMENT
3,333.33
MMBA DUES ASSESSMENT
10764 010401
Account No Account Description
5913.6601 WATER PURCHASED
1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
1110/01 12:08:32
Page - 17
Business Unit
DISTRIBUTION
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10527
LICENSE -PEST
1643.6260
LICENSES & PERMITS GENERAL TURF CARE
10528
24911
5620.6230
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK
10529 SEMINAR 1640.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL
10795
010501
1551.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10795
010501
1552.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10795
010501
1646.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10795
010501
5912.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10795
010501
5820.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10795
010501
5111.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10772 185 1260.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
10635 101779 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10767 010101 5820.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
10767 010101 5840.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
CITY HALL GENERAL
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
BUILDINGS
50TH STREET GENERAL
ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT
ENGINEERING GENERAL
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
50TH STREET GENERAL
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
R55CKREG3 LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 — 1112/01
Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No
3,333.33 MMBA DUES ASSESSMENT 10767 010101
10668 1279
1110/01 12:08:32
Page - 18
Account No Account Description Business Unit
5860.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10530 1213007GCKV 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
10531
112900lEZVV
10,000.00
CRAFT SUPPLIES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
217397
1/11/01
5610.6103
100914
MUNICILITE CO.
742.52
RESPONDER, MAG MOUNT EDGE
742.52
217398
1/11/01
100921
NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE
95.90
CRAFT SUPPLIES
95.90
217399
1/11/01
101108
NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE
20.40
CRAFT SUPPLIES
20.40
217400
1/11/01
104034
NESS, STEFANIE
35.00
SKATING LESSON REFUND
35.00
217401
1111/01
102607
NORTH MEMORIAL HEALTH CARE
80.00
FALL 2000 COURSES
80.00
217402
1/11/01
100929
NORTH STAR ICE
94.50
94.50
217403
1/11/01
101631
NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL TRUCK
408.85
PAN, GASKET
408.85
217404
1/11/01
102652
NORTHLAND CHEMICAL CORP.
87.10
DEGREASER
87.10
217405
1/11/01
100930
NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO.
295.99
MOUNT /DISMOUNT
172.97
MOUNT /DISMOUNT
468.96
217406
1/11/01
100936
OLSEN COMPANIES
10668 1279
1110/01 12:08:32
Page - 18
Account No Account Description Business Unit
5860.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10530 1213007GCKV 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
10531
112900lEZVV
5110.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
10757
010501
5610.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ED ADMINISTRATION
10632 PTAC24 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
10589
41036406
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10532
305745
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10669 050134 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10662 NW -68101 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES
10671 NW -68067 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
Vendor
_ - --
10591
679821
17.87
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10592
3231073
17.87
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
217407
1/11/01
5822.5514
101500
PAPER DEPOT
10594
3231074
432.80
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10595
2321075
432.80
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
217408
1/11/01
5862.5512
100274
PGI COMPANIES INC
10726
681433
758.28
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10727
681432
758.28
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10728
3231078
1,516.56
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
217409
1/11/01
5842.5513
100743
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
10730
3231079
132.69-
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10731
3231077
154.08
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
83.44 -
21.00-
267.10-
300.69-
200.48
4,083.51
264.61
142.38 -
25.69-
25.69-
52.39-
3,651.61
217410
1111/01
100119
PING
325.58
170.31
495.89
217411
1/11101
102156
PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING
504.95
316.95
391.18
76.50
29.95
3_30.99
1,650.52
Explanation
HOOK
KIDS CRAFT SUPPLIES
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 -- 1/12101
PO # Doc No Inv No
10533 65253
Account No Account Description
1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
10534 DEC 00 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 19
Business Unit
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
DRIVER INSPECTION REPORT 10672 21809 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
WORK ORDERS 10673 218091 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10590
3231270
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10591
679821
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10592
3231073
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10593
3231076
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
10594
3231074
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10595
2321075
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10725
681434
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10726
681433
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10727
681432
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10728
3231078
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10729
3231080
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10730
3231079
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10731
3231077
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
GOLF CLUBS 10535 4872703 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
GOLF CLUBS 10536 4853599 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
10596
38452
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10597
38453
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10732
38599
5842.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
YORK SELLING
10733
38644
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10734
38645
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
10735
38607
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11101 -1112/01
PO # Doc No Inv No .
10537 00951224
Check #
Date
Amount
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
Vendor
Explanation
217412
1/11/01
TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS
101303
PIONEER PRESS
321432
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
96.46
-
321431
ADVERTISING
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
96.46
916886 -00
5860.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
217413
1/11/01
917523 -00
101811
PREMIER FLEET SERVICES
VERNON SELLING
2,776.66
LADDER TRUCK LABOR
2,776.66
217414
1/11101
100965
PRIMESCAPE PRODUCTS
135.37
PLANTS, FLOWERS
135.37
217415
1111/01
100968
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
185.40
656.08
811.24
120.40
1,773.12
217416
1/11/01
103094
PROTECTION ONE
117.00
1/1/2001 - 3/31/2001 SERVICE
117.00
217417
1/11/01
101877
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY
510.90
BASIC LIFE
52.20
G. HUGHES
26.25
COBRA
589.35
217418
1/11/01
100970
QUALITY REFRIGERATION INC
354.92
REPAIR
354.92
217419
1/11/01
100971
QUALITY WINE
36.07 -
170.19-
160.26-
421.74
8.23-
747.89
Account No Account Description
5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 20
Business Unit
GOLF DOME PROGRAM
10816
14808
1470.6180
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10538
142974
5620.6620
TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS
EDINBOROUGH PARK
10736
321419
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10737
321420
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10738
321432
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10739
321431
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10768
010101.
5511.6250
ALARM SERVICE
ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS
10650
122900
1550.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
10650
122900
1550.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
10650
122900
1550.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
10539 137846 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS
10598
916405 -00
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10740
916199 -00
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10741
916200 -00
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10742
916886 -00
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
10742
916886 -00
5860.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
10743
917523 -00
5862.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
VERNON SELLING
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
TELEPHONE
Vendor
Explanation
122500
1481.6188
14.84-
Page - 21
1/11/01 --1/12/01
122500
1550.6188
TELEPHONE
1,270.80
PO # Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
12.57-
917523 -00
5860.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
10744
2,263.43
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10744
917393 -00
22.45-
TRADE DISCOUNTS
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
10745
917270 -00
5842.5513
3,965.19
YORK SELLING
10745
917270 -00
5840.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
78.84-
10746
917256 -00
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
8,165.60
917256 -00
5840.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
217420
1/11/01
122500
103478
OWEST
YORK OCCUPANCY
10540
122500
55.22
TELEPHONE
VERNON OCCUPANCY
85.42
5,370.97
172.44
299.78
250.00
228.97
117.30
373.85
1,166.87
602.91
371.23
496.15
9,591.11
217421
1/11/01
100973
RADIO SHACK
7.33
-7.33
GENERAL SUPPLIES
217422
1/11/01
102924
RDO EQUIPMENT CO.
115.88
PAPER PART
148.21-
CREDIT ON ACCOUNT
180.05
CUTTING EDGE, BOLT
147.72
217423
1/11/01
104022
RED & BLUE PROGRAM
125.00
ADVERTISING
125.00
217424
1/11/01
100149
RED ROOSTER AUTO STORES
197.20
SUPPLIES
CITY OF EDINA
122500
1470.6188
TELEPHONE
1/10/01 12:08:32
Council Check Register
122500
1481.6188
TELEPHONE
Page - 21
1/11/01 --1/12/01
122500
1550.6188
TELEPHONE
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
PO # Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
10743
917523 -00
5860.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
10744
917393 -00
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10744
917393 -00
5860.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
10745
917270 -00
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10745
917270 -00
5840.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
10746
917256 -00
5842.5512
COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR
YORK SELLING
10746
917256 -00
5840.4408
TRADE DISCOUNTS
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
10540
122500
1470.6188
TELEPHONE
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10540
122500
1481.6188
TELEPHONE
YORK FIRE STATION
10540
122500
1550.6188
TELEPHONE
CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
10540
122500
1622.6188
TELEPHONE
SKATING & HOCKEY
10540
122500
1646.6188
TELEPHONE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
10540
122500
5420.6188
TELEPHONE
CLUB HOUSE
10540
122500
5511.6188
TELEPHONE
ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS
10540
122500
5610.6188
TELEPHONE
ED ADMINISTRATION
10540
122500
5911.6188
TELEPHONE
PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER
10540
122500
5932.6188
TELEPHONE
GENERAL STORM SEWER
10540
122500
5821.6188
TELEPHONE
50TH ST OCCUPANCY
10540
122500
5841.6188
TELEPHONE
YORK OCCUPANCY
10540
122500
5861.6188
TELEPHONE
VERNON OCCUPANCY
10636 079144 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
9584 118474 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
9585 A22006 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10541 119120 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10542 008312 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM
10681 DEC 31 STMT 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
R55CKREG3 LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/10/01 12:08:32
Council Check Register Page - 22
1/11/01 —1/12/01
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation PO #
Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
197.20
217425
1/11/01
102408
RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED
193.23
MOUNT BRACKET, JACK
10794
1319079 -01
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
193.23
217426
1/11101
102066
RUST, ROGER
225.00
ICE SCULPTURES FOR 1 -21 -01
10778
010401
5610.6136
PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER
ED ADMINISTRATION
225.00
217427
1/11/01
103269
S.H. BARTLETT CO INC
181.48
SOLENOID, SENSOR REPAIR KIT
10651
.4071
1646.6530
REPAIR PARTS
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
181.48
217428
1/11/01
100987
SA -AG INC
1.656.41
SAND
10830
13207
1318.6517
SAND GRAVEL & ROCK
SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
1,656.41
217429
1111/01
101822
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT COMMERCIAL A
175.00
MEMBERSHIP FEES
10773
FEES
1553.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
175.00
217430
1/11/01
104030
SETINA MFG. CO. INC.
46.43
PARTITION
10637
88767
1400.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
46.43
217431
1/11101
104044
SHAKOPEE VALLEY PRINTING
1,234.83
PRINTING
10839
6584
5110.6575
PRINTING
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
1,234.83
217432
1/11/01
100998
SHERWIN WILLIAMS
71.91
PAINT
10543
4669 -7
5420.6530
REPAIR PARTS
CLUB HOUSE
28.59
PAINT
10818
4858 -6
5422.6532
PAINT
MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
100.50
217433
1/11/01
104023
SMOKSTAD, LINDA
50.00
RENTAL DEPOSIT REFUND
10544
122700
5401.4553
CLUBHOUSE
GOLF REVENUES
50.00
217434
1/11/01
101342
SOCCER EXPRESS
496.00
EXPLORERS UNIFORMS
10638
122900 -01
1419.6203
UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
RESERVE PROGRAM
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 -1/12/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
Check #
Date
Amount
GENERAL
Vendor
Explanation
50TH ST SELLING
5842.5514
496.00
YORK SELLING
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
217435
1/11/01
101002
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS
INC
1,670.95
2,451.30
563.35
4,685.60
217436
1111/01
102203
SOUTHWEST JOURNAL
94.67
ADVERTISING
94.67
ADVERTISING
94.66
ADVERTISING
284.00
217437
1/11/01
101021
SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC
9.05
BEVERAGES
9.05
217438
1/11/01
101004
SPS COMPANIES
665.42
DRAIN CLEANER, O -RING
665.42
217439
1/11/01
101007
STAR TRIBUNE
113.88
ADVERTISING
1,379.35
WANT ADS
1,493.23
217440
1/11/01
102918
STOUTEN, JAQUELINE
250.00
ART WORK SOLD AT EAC
250.00
217441
1/11/01
101017
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
138.54
MOTOR, PUMP
198.14
SWITCH
126.65
BUSHINGS, PINS, RETAINER
463.33
217442
1/11/01
101018
SUBURBAN PROPANE
303.42
LP FUEL
303.42
10599 115177
10747 115376
10748 115366
10645 35731
10645 35731_
10645 35731
1/10101 12:08:32
Page - 23
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
GENERAL
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
5842.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
YORK SELLING
5822.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
50TH ST SELLING
5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
10827
0419133038
1301.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10545
3636674
5620.6406
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
50TH ST SELLING
YORK SELLING
VERNON SELLING
GENERAL MAINTENANCE
EDINBOROUGH PARK
10546 458027001 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM
10836 ACCT 1550.6121 . ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL
003421003
10808 010401 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD
10547 149658CVW 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10548 149697CVW 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10549 149807CVW 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
10550 121700 5521.6581 GASOLINE
ART CENTER REVENUES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
ARENA ICE MAINT
R55CKREG3 LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/10/01 12:08:32
Council Check Register Page - 24
1/11/01 --1/12/01
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor Explanation PO #
Doc No
Inv No
Account No
Account Description
Business Unit
217443
1/11/01
101020
SUBURBAN TIRE & AUTO
566.06
TIRES
10675
142879
1553.6583
TIRES & TUBES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
188.69
TIRES
10676
142822
1553.6583
TIRES & TUBES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
454.07
TIRES
10677
142508
1553.6583
TIRES & TUBES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
454.07-
CREDIT MEMO
10678
142507
1553.6583
TIRES & TUBES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
.1,260.98
TIRES
10679
142441
1553.6583
TIRES & TUBES
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
2,015.73
217444
1/11101
100900
SUN NEWSPAPERS
171.60
PRINT ORDINANCE 2000 -7
10551
384703
1120.6120
ADVERTISING LEGAL
ADMINISTRATION
14841
ADVERTISING
10644
385929
5822.6122
ADVERTISING OTHER
50TH ST SELLING
148.42
ADVERTISING
10644
385929
5842.6122
ADVERTISING OTHER
YORK SELLING
148.42
ADVERTISING
10644
385929
5862.6122
ADVERTISING OTHER
VERNON SELLING
616.85
217445
1111/01
101171
SUPERIOR SHORES CONFERENCE CEN
261.39
WORKSHOP DEPOSIT
10801
010401
5110.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
208.50
WORKSHOP DEPOSIT
10801
010401
5110.6564
CRAFT SUPPLIES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
469.89
217446
1/11101
101026
TARGET
10.60
LIGHTS
10552
86767
5420.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CLUB HOUSE
10.60
-
217447 -
1/11/01
103556
THOMPSON, MYRTLE L.
284.94
AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT
10760
010501
1001.4329
AMBULANCE FEES
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
284.94
217448
1/11/01
101035
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
2,558.30
10749
215156
5862.5514
COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER
VERNON SELLING
24.20
10750
215157
5862.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
VERNON SELLING
2,582.50
„
217449
1/11/01
101038
TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY
191.70
WELDING TANK LEASE
10553
703863
1646.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
89.95
- WELDING GASES, TOOLS
10554
366902
5910.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
GENERAL (BILLING)
281.65
217450
1/11101
101693
TOTAL REGISTER
211.94
IOMEGA ZIP DRIVE
10555
10893
5822.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
50TH ST SELLING .
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11101 - 1/12101
Check #
Date
Amount
DEC 2000
Vendor Explanation PO #
Doc No
Inv No
1470.6510
FIRST AID SUPPLIES
211.94
648.48
217451
1/11/01
101579
TREADWAY GRAPHICS
1/11/01
100371
UNITED RENTALS
322.37
12/10/00
BLUE EDINA MUGS
10639
5253
342.51
819.05
322.37
BLADES FOR CUT -OFF SAW
10556
15236733 -001
1646.6556
217452
1/11/01
10640
103121
TURTLE BAY BUILDING SERVICE IN
CUT -OFF SAW
10557
15236139 -001
1646.6556
985.13
JAN. 2001 SERVICE
10787
619
985.13
217456
1/11/01
217453
1/11/01
US FOODSERVICE INC
101047
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO
554.32
SPRING CLAMP, CABLE, KEY
10824
114037
5320.5510
COST OF GOODS SOLD
427.18
HINGES, ROLLERS, LOBE, SERVICE
10825
114028
981.50
217457
1111/01
217454
1/11101
104042
U.S. LATEX PRODUCTS INC.
Account No Account Description
1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
1/10/01 12:08:32
Page - 25
POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
5620.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINBOROUGH PARK
1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS
1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
POOL CONCESSIONS
YORK OCCUPANCY
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
10,656.00
CONTRACT PAYMENT
648.48
DEC 2000
AMBULANCE SUPPLIES
10810
12122W
1470.6510
FIRST AID SUPPLIES
648.48
217459 1111/01
102970 VERIZON WIRELESS BELLEVUE
217455
1/11/01
100371
UNITED RENTALS
10640
12/10/00
1410.6188
TELEPHONE
PATROL
342.51
819.05
10640
BLADES FOR CUT -OFF SAW
10556
15236733 -001
1646.6556
TOOLS
CELL PHONES
10640
998.97
1450.6406
CUT -OFF SAW
10557
15236139 -001
1646.6556
TOOLS
1,818.02
217456
1/11/01
101908
US FOODSERVICE INC
364.92
POPCORN BOXES
10682
810773
5320.5510
COST OF GOODS SOLD
364.92
217457
1111/01
101058
VAN PAPER CO.
430.79
TOWELS, BAGS
10792
352272
5841.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
29234
LIQUOR BAGS
10793
351902
5840.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
723.13
217458
1/11/01
103936
VANGUARD APPRAISALS INC.
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
CENT SVC PW BUILDING
FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
POOL CONCESSIONS
YORK OCCUPANCY
LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
10,656.00
CONTRACT PAYMENT
10831
DEC 2000
1190.6710
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
ASSESSING
10,656.00
217459 1111/01
102970 VERIZON WIRELESS BELLEVUE
442.33
CELL PHONES
10640
12/10/00
1410.6188
TELEPHONE
PATROL
342.51
CELL PHONES
10640
12/10/00
1411.6188
TELEPHONE
INVESTIGATION
27.83
CELL PHONES
10640
12/10/00
1450.6406
GENERAL SUPPLIES
ANIMAL CONTROL
R55CKREG3 LOG20000
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation
10601
052847
812.67
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
217460
1/11/01
5862.5513
101223 WALSER FORD
VERNON SELLING
10752
053015
58.14
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
SWITCH ASSEMBLY
10753
38199
58.14
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
217461
1/11/01
5842.5513
103466 WASTE MANAGEMENT - SAVAGE MN
YORK SELLING
2,745.04
REFUSE
2,745.04
217462
1/11101
103266 WELSH COMPANIES INC
789.50
JANUARY SERVICE
789.50
217463
1/11/01
101076 WEST PHOTO
502.55
SEAMLESS ARTIC WHITE
502.55
217464
1111/01
101077 WEST WELD SUPPLY CO.
194.76
PIPE NIPPLES, DRILL BITS
194.76
217465
1/11/01
101191 WILKINSON, JENNIFER
42.45
FILM DEVELOPING
42.45
217466
1/11101
103336 WILLIAMS ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS
1,045.95
PROFESSIONAL SERV.
1,045.95
217467
1111/01
101033 WINE COMPANY, THE
60.95
360.95
624.75
1,561.32
2,607.97
217468
1/11/01
101312 WINE MERCHANTS
665.93
175.69
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register
1/11/01 -- 1/12/01
PO # Doc No Inv No
Account No Account Description
10558 89529FOW 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS
11110/011 12:08:32
Page - 26
Business Unit
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
10774 0945406 -2282 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH
-9
10762 010101
10559 2467937
10674 36526
10781 010401
5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY
5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER
5910.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES
GOLF DOME PROGRAM
GENERAL (BILLING)
2210.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS
10683 0008574 5311.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POOL OPERATION
10600
052829
5822.5515
COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX
50TH ST SELLING
10601
052847
5822.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
50TH ST SELLING
10751
053012
5862.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
VERNON SELLING
10752
053015
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10753
38199
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
10754
38123
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
CITY OF EDINA
1/10101 12:08:32
R55CKREG3
LOG20000
Council Check Register
Page - 27
1/11/01 — 1/12/01
Check #
Date
Amount
Vendor
Explanation
PO # Doc No
Inv No Account No
- - - --
Account Description
- - - --
Business Unit
841.62
217469
1/11101
101082
WITTEK GOLF SUPPLY
-
375.09
_.375.09
FREIGHT CHARGE FOR MATS 10560
DE6083
5210.6590
RANGE BALLS
GOLF DOME PROGRAM
217470
1/11/01
102017
WONDER WEAVERS
100.00
PERFORMANCE 1 -23 -01
10783
010401
5610.6136
PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER
ED ADMINISTRATION
100.00
217471
1/11101
101086
WORLD CLASS WINES INC
795.00
10755
101911
5842.5513
COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE
YORK SELLING
795.00
217472
1/11/01
100568
XEROX CORPORATION
331.23
COPIER SERVICE - DEC.
2000 10641.
079337686
1400.6230
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTPOLICE DEPT. GENERAL
331.23
217473
1/11/01
103922
YEAR ROUND GOLF
949.98
PUTTING GREEN
.10561
339108
5210.6122
ADVERTISING OTHER
GOLF DOME PROGRAM,
949.98
217474
1111/01
101091
ZIEGLER INC
994.04
POWER UNIT
10562
PC000375490
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
62.14
SWITCHES
10828
PC000375841
1553.6530
REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
1,056.18
217475
1/12101
102918
STOUTEN,- JAQUELINE
420.00
TEACHING AC
10841
123100
5110.6103
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
420.00
654,852.19
Grand Total
Payment Instrument Totals
Check Total
654,852.19
Total Payments 654,852.19
R55CKSUM3 `Vers: LOG20000
Company
01000
GENERAL FUND
02200
COMMUNICATIONS FUND
04000
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
04800
CONSTRUCTION FUND
05100
ART CENTER FUND
05200
GOLF DOME FUND
05300
AQUATIC CENTER FUND
05400 _
GOLF COURSE FUND
05500'
ICE ARENA FUND
05600
EDINBOROUGH /CENT LAKES FUND
05800
LIQUOR FUND
05900
UTILITY FUND
05930
STORM -SEWER FUND
05950
RECYCLING FUND
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Summary
Amount
157,005.03
5,931.84
15, 580.40
260.00
8,668.59
11,591.94
1,426.75
3,120.82
1,866.32
7,812.21
114, 361.43
288,124.79
1,166.87
37,935.20
---.--..654,852.19
We confirm to the best of our knowledge
and belief, that these daims
comply in all materiel respects
with the requirements of the City
of Edina purchasing policies and
procedures date � ? —Qc��
1/10/01 12:12:44
Page - 1
7129 Gleason Road
Edina, MN 55439
January 3, 2001
Edina City Council
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Council members:
After 20 years of activism in recycling, including lobbying on the issue at the state
legislature and membership on the Twin Cities Plastics Recycling Task Force, my
commitment has finally been thwarted by the change to curbside pickup.
The prospect of carrying several weighty containers 100 feet down a snowy,
inclined driveway and then trying to position them atop a 10 foot snowbank at
the street has caused my surrender. I will heretofore be painfully placing my
recyclables in the garbage cans that are serviced at my garage.
What a pity.
Sincerely,
O �
Virginia weeny
cc: Solvei Wilmot, Recycling Coordinator
City of MIMI
January 5, 2001
Virginia R. Sweeny
7129 Gleason Road
Edina, MN 55439
Dear Ms. Sweeny:
Thank you for your letter and concern regarding curbside recycling. You have been an advocate
of recycling and I am sorry that you find a need to consider putting your recycling in the trash.
However, provisions are available for people that are physically unable or elderly and frail.
Please call me at 952- 826 -0463 to discuss these provisions.
Sincerely,
Solvei M. Wilmot
Recycling Coordinator
cc: City Council members
City Hall (952) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (952) 826 -0390
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (952) 826 -0379
e
1
EDINA PARK BOARD.
7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
DECEMBER 12, 2000
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom White, Andrew Herring, Dave Fredlund, Karla Sitek, George
Klus, Floyd Grabiel, Andy Finsness, John Murrin
MEMBERS ABSENT: Linda Presthus, Chuck Mooty, Scot Housh
STAFF PRESENT: John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, Donna Tilsner, Susie
Miller, John Valliere
I. APPROVAL OF THE TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2000 PARK BOARD
MINUTES
Mr. Klus indicated that a correction needs to, be made to the November 14, 2000 Park
Board Minutes. On page eight it should read "raising the greens fee for patrons ".
George Klus MOVED TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 14, 2000 PARK BOARD
MINUTES WITH THE CORRECTION BEING MADE. Karla Sitek SECONDED THE
MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED WITH CORRECTION BEING MADE.
II. PLAYGROUND PROGRAM AND NEW RECREATION PROGRAM
.PRESENTATION - SUSIE MILLER AND DONNA TILSNER
Mr. Keprios introduced Susie Miller, Adaptive Recreation Supervisor and Donna Tilsner,
Recreation Supervisor. He noted that they have come up with some really creative ideas
for new programs, which they will discuss, as well as talk a little bit about the current
playground program.
Ms. Tilsner indicated that the Park and Recreation Department has offered a summer
playground program_ for many years. She noted that last summer they had over 600
participants and 22 leaders spread out over 13 parks. She explained that. the program is
six weeks long and consists of playing games, making crafts, having special events,
singing and reading. Ms. Tilsner pointed out that they also offered three separate field
trips that the kids could sign up for. She stated that last year they did hire a games
specialist and an arts and crafts specialist who went out to the parks and helped give the
playground leaders some new zest to. their playground program. She indicated that she
felt this was very successful and did enhance the program.
Ms. Tilsner explained that they have some new plans for the coming year. They hope to
have the Humane Society visit the playgrounds. They are also going to have Kathy
Iverson, Edina Chemical Health Specialist, make some presentations at the playgrounds
as well as there will be visits by the Edina Police and Fire Departments. She stated that
this year they are also hoping to set up a library program. Ms. Tilsner indicated that also
new for this year they are going to be using Countryside Park as a site for the older kids,
ages 9 to 12. This way with all of the older kids at one site maybe more kids in this age
group will sign up for the program.
Ms. Tilsner explained that every year it's getting harder and harder to find 'people to work
and they continually need to be creative to try to find ways to attract workers. Therefore,
this year they are going to start a new program called "Lead" (Leadership Encouragement
and Development). This program will teach the youth some leadership skills, self -
esteem, working as a team and some other skills that might be useful as they are entering
into the part-time work force. She stated that their hope is these youth will want to
volunteer the rest of summer and when they become 16 year -olds they will want to work
for the park and recreation department.
Ms. Miller indicated that this year they are going to offer their first field trip for families
and it will be a trip to the Minnesota Vikings Training Camp in Mankato. She noted that
they are hoping it will somehow be supported by sponsorship and will therefore be fairly
inexpensive.
Ms. Tilsner explained that last year they held their first fishing clinic at Lake Cornelia
and they will be having it again this year. She indicated that they worked with the
Minnaqua program, who provided the instructor. The clinic runs for'approximately three
hours and the participants learn where fish live and eat and as well as'how to bait a hook.
At the end of the clinic the kids go home with a starter tackle box and some handouts.
The fee for this clinic is $5.00 and each session can accommodate 30 kids to which both
sessions filled last year. They are hoping to add another session this year depending on
whether or not Minnaqua is available for another session.
Ms. Tilsner noted that last year.a gentleman started "Chess in -the Parks" which averaged
20 participants every Tuesday and Thursday afternoon at Rosland Park. Participants did
need to pre- register, however, there was no fee involved. There were usually two to three
adults chaperoning'and everyone had a great time. This year they are planning on having
the program again but they have yet to determine which park they will' use.
Ms. Miller explained that they are going to start a 3 on 3 basketball league of champs for
6`h, 7", and 8`h graders at Countryside Park. There will be no officials, just a staff member
to monitor the game and keep score.
Ms. Miller indicated that they. are looking at starting a sports spectacular that would be
held two times a week for four weeks for 9 to 12 year olds. This is an age group where
they really need to find something for the kids to do. The program will teach skills for all
2
different sports as well as start up some of the.old time favorites, such as :marbles, bocci
ball and.croquet.
Ms. Tilsner commented that last year they had a nature camp which they plan on having
again this year. She noted that it is a four day program held at Rosland Park where they
learn about a lot of different things that are at the- park.such as birds, insects, etc.. She
stated that they will also do some crafts and on the last day of camp they will go
swimming at the aquatic center. She, indicated that last year's nature camp was a great
success.
Ms. Miller pointed out that last year was the first time they had the Fab 4 and 5 program.
It is held two days a week for 20 kids. Because the program filled up so quickly they
added two more sessions. This is a great opportunity for 4 and 5 year olds to make a
connection with their parks and park leaders and it also helps make the transition to the
playground program a lot easier:
Mr. Herring indicated that as he understands it the playground program is supervised,
however, it is not a daycare. Therefore, he noted that he does have some concerns about
4 and 5 year olds and asked if a license is needed for this age group. Ms. Miller replied
that no license is required and that yes, it does become more child care than what the
playground program is and that there is one staff member for every five kids. She
commented that the program is 1 %2 hours long&and that no activities last for more than 10
or 15 minutes because of their attention span. Mr.'Herring asked how drop off and pick
up are handled to which Ms. Miller replied that the staff check in the children when they
are dropped off and checked out when the kids are picked up: -The parents are also
supposed to let the leaders know if someone else is picking up their child/ren. Mr.
Keprios indicated that he thinks we are covered but he will double check to make.sure.
Mr. Keprios pointed out that we are trying to offer more recreation -based programs as
opposed to just athletics. He noted that in keeping with the asset building initiative they
are trying to connect kids with adults and offer more family oriented and recreation
oriented programming. He indicated that he is very proud of his staff, they are very
creative and have done a great j ob.
III. BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE. CLUBHOUSE IMPROVEMENTS — JOHN..
VALLIERE
Mr. Valliere explained that in 1992 the Park Board and City Council approved a master,
plan for the Braemar Golf Course Clubhouse. Therefore, they have slowly been working
on what they can afford to do each year and that included the expansion of the pro shop
and the addition of the decks which accommodates the golf cars underneath it. However,
they are now at a point where they can afford to make some changes because of the good
year they've had. He noted that they cannot afford to do it all at this time but there are
three things that they would like to see accomplished at this time. He stated that first they
need to have an elevator put in that meets the •ADA requirements. They have been told
that the cost for the elevator is approximately $200,000 compared to the $85,000 they
were previously told a few years ago.
Mr. Valliere explained what they would like to see done on the'. lower level and noted this
portion of the plan would cost approximately $342,000. He'then explained what he
would like'to see done on the upper level which would cost approximately $166,000. He
commented that the project has not yet been bid and that these are the architect's
estimates and noted that they do include a percentage for overrun.
Mr. White asked Mr. Valliere if there will still be a long hallway between the pro shop
and the clubroom to which he indicated yes, however, it is something that he will look
into possibly changing. Mr. Valliere stated'that at this time he is seeking approval from
the Park Board to move ahead on this project. He again noted because this was their best
year ever it unexpectedly put some money in their pockets that will help them accomplish
this. Mr. Herring asked how much for the two options to which Mr. Valliere replied
approximately $508,000.
Mr. Fredlund asked if the golf course is being required to install an elevator to which Mr.
Valliere replied at this time they are not required to but that in the near f iture:they will.
Mr. Keprios noted that it is his understanding that when you make significant .
improvements such as this it is a requirement.
Mr;. Murrin indicated that he thinks $200,000 for an elevator is very expensive and noted
that a client of his put in two elevators at a senior center and it only cost $90,000 for two
elevators. Mr. White noted that he knows someone who put in an elevator at a building
he owned and it cost $120,000. Mr. Valliere commented that it would definitely help if
he could bring that number down.
Mr. Herring asked if $500,000 is put.into the-golf course are there any other crying needs
in the city right now. Mr: Keprios replied that the golf course has a long -range capital
plan that is going to be afforded assuming the golf course continues to do as well
financially as it has. This is the highest on their priority list of what needs to be done.
Mr. Klus asked wasn't this master plan originally approved back in 1992 to which Mr.
Keprios replied yes and noted that Gordon Hughes, City Manager, wanted the Park Board
to revisit it to be sure the they had their current blessing. Mr. He asked about the
current debt to which Mr. Keprios replied that the golf course is doing so well financially
that they not only paid for their operating expenses and current debt but that their cash
flow'is about $770,000 to the positive to date. He noted that the golfers are essentially
paying for all of these improvements and not tax dollars.
Mr. Klus suggested that one option would be to approve Mr. Valliere's recommendation
up'to $515,000.
Mr. Herring indicated that he thinks Mr. Valliere is just looking for a general approval.
Mr. Klus commented that he has a problem with general approvals but it always seems to
EI
costa lot more than anticipated and we need to be somewhat fiscally responsible even
though the City Council can over rule us.
Tom White MOVED TO APPROVE GOING FORWARD WITH THE PLAN AND
BIDDING OUT OPTION 1 AND OPTION 2 AND THEN COME BACK TO THE
PARK BOARD WITH THE NUMBERS SO WE CAN HAVE ONE FINAL LOOK AT
IT BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD. Dave Fredlund SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
IV. SKATE PARK PROPOSAL - YORKTOWN PARK
Mr. Keprios gave a presentation on the proposed area for the skate park. He noted that it
is being called the "Tri-City Skate Park" because of the three communities involved. He
also noted that Mr. Herring should be credited for this because it was his idea. He stated
that all three cities are contributing $80,000 and that the YMCA will be putting in some
dollars for parking and possibly for some capital shortfall. Mr. Keprios explained that
they are currently waiting to hear the outcome of the '/4 million dollar grant they applied
for to help make this happen. Mr. Keprios noted that the beauty of the plan is that the
YMCA would run it, operate it, assume all operating losses and liability as well as cover
all insurance. This is a win, win for everyone involved. Mr. Keprios pointed out that if
for some reason it is no longer popular and we abandon it and decide not to make it a
skate park anymore, it's on our property and we will decide what to do with it at that
time. Mr. Keprios showed where the free standing building would be located. He
commented that it will displace an adult practice softball field that hasn't been very
desirable for quite some time and would require a lot of money to bring it up to a more
useable condition.
Mr. Keprios indicated that he is asking for the Park Board's approval of this in concept
and then see what happens with the' /4 million dollar grant proposal. Mr. Herring asked if
the YMCA wants this next to their building to which Mr. Keprios replied yes, however,
the proposed site offers a greater opportunity for future outdoor skate park expansion.
Mr. Keprios stated that there are pros and cons to this. One of the pros is that there is no
requirement to have a YMCA membership to the use the facility, it's just a flat fee that
the Park Board would be approving.
Mr. White asked if the condominium owners have been notified that this building may be
going up to which Mr. Keprios replied they have not yet notified them. However, he will
certainly do that before we get too far into the process. He stated that thankfully the
existing privately owned tennis courts serve as a pretty good buffer.
Mr. Finsness asked Mr. Keprios what he thinks the chances are for receiving the I/4
million dollar grant. Mr. Keprios noted that he thinks the chances are pretty good,
especially since it's a collaborative effort with two other cities, which is looked upon as
very favorable. He stated that they hope to know by the end of the month. Mr. Klus
asked about fundraising to which Mr. Keprios replied that they don't have an organized
campaign yet because they want to see what the dollars and requirements are.
5
V.
Mr. Grabiel asked what the Park Board has already approved on this. Mr. White replied
that the Park Board authorized Mr. Keprios to go forward and talk with the Southdale
YMCA as well as other cities and organizations to see if everyone could reach some sort
of a joint agreement as to how we could proceed.
Mr. Murrin asked if the YMCA would keep the profits to which Mr. Keprios replied there
will not be any profits. However, the YMCA is willing to assume and absorb any
operating losses.
Floyd Grabiel MOVED TO APPROVE THE SKATE PARK PROPOSAL IN
CONCEPT. John Murrin SECONDED THE MOTION., MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE UPDATE
Mr. Keprios indicated that he and Mr. MacHolda just attended their 12' Blue Ribbon
Committee meeting last night and they are making great progress. He noted that
currently there is 8.4 million dollars worth of city /park property improvements. Mr.
Keprios then handed out two lists to which one was sorted by park and the other was
sorted by project.
Mr. Keprios explained that the Committee made great progress last night on the proposed
projects planned on being built on School District property. He noted that they have sent
the architect back on a charge to fill in some holes because we are still waiting for some
answers on some of the scenarios. He stated that they are still at a loss as to where to put
the bubble and the exact alignment of the gymnasiums. Mr. Keprios then handed out a
list on the School District property projects that are currently under consideration. There
is 21 million dollars listed at the east campus and $20,300,000 at the west campus for a
total of 41 million dollars. Mr. Keprios noted that a lot of this can change because if you
look at the west campus they are considering a 25 meter pool versus a 50 meter pool
which would definitely mean a difference in cost. Mr. Keprios indicated that the one area
they don't have any figures on yet is the renovation of the soccer field on the lower level
on the inside of the track at the west campus, the architects are still working on those
numbers.
Mr. Keprios indicated that in looking at the different scenarios they need to determine
whether the soccer field at the west campus is within a flood plain, which therefore would
not work. He stated that they are also looking at possibly the Braemar soccer field site
and are waiting to hear on the feasibility as well as whether or not fire trucks can get back
there.
Mr. Keprios explained that if we were to build four gyms, there would be two at Valley
View, one at Concord and one at South View. With a 25 meter pool, the projects on
School District property would come to $29,377,653.00 and then add to that the Park
on
Department's 8.4 million, we are looking at a 37 million dollar, referendum. He noted
that these are just some of the scenarios that they are looking at.
Mr. Murrin asked how well the performing arts is going over to which Mr. Keprios
replied he thinks it's going very well, however, the Normandale Elementary people have
spoken very negatively about it. Mr. Klus commented that the people from Normandale
have been against everything. Mr. Murrin asked if Normandale School is pretty positive
about doing some of the performing arts on the west side campus to which Mr. Keprios
replied that they might be, however, they have not discussed it.
Ms. Sitek indicated that she thinks Concord is the perfect place for the gyms.and noted
that she gets annoyed that we listen so much to the people from Normandale. Mr.'
Keprios stated that Dr. Dragseth is currently trying to figure out a way to get through this
and address the concerns of parents who have children in the Normandale Elementary
French:Emersion School. He noted that.there seems to be a lot of support for the
performing arts and all of the field improvements. and gyms. He stated that he also thinks
we are getting closer to having an answer for the pool. Mr. Murrin asked if they are
leaning towards a 25 meter pool or a 50 meter pool to which Mr. Keprios responded that
he thinks when all is said and done it will probably be a 25 meter pool. Mr. White asked
if the operating costs are a lot higher for a 50 meter pool to which Mr. Keprios responded
that the architect has indicated it would only cost an additional $35,000, however, that
estimate is speculative at this point in time. He noted that Mr. MacHolda and he were
both surprised by that number and feel it might be considerably higher than that. Mr.
MacHolda stated that he was very surprised by what he heard last night because when he
compares the report from last night to the report they did in 1997 there is a $400,000
difference in.terms of building and a $20,000 to $30,000 in terms of operation. Mr.
Keprios commented that the University of Minnesota will also tell you that the numbers
in the report are not realistic. He noted that he thinks TSP was put on a real fast track to
come up with some answers and therefore, didn't have enough time to thoroughly
research the operating expenses. He noted that they have been asked to revisit the
numbers on the 50 meter pool and to also see if it would actually fit on that site. Mr.
Murrin asked Mr. Klus if he thinks we really need a 50 meter pool in the community to
which he replied yes, he thinks we do if we are going to stay in competitive swimming.
Mr. MacHolda pointed out that at the College Division 2 and 3 levels, 50 meter pools are
unheard of and at Division 1 you see very few. He commented that 50 meter pools are
even becoming obsolete in the outdoor setting. More and more people are demolishing
50 meter pools and putting in family aquatic centers. Mr. MacHolda stated that if all of,
the high schools across. the country were surveyed you would probably find that Edina is
the only high school with a 50 meter pool. Mr. Keprios commented that swim clubs are
the ones who need 50 meter pools, and that high school kids do not need 50 meter pools.
Mr. Keprios indicated, that he thinks an argument could be made that maybe a 50 meter
pool should be built somewhere as a regional pool and get the state involved.
Mr. White asked if they would be. able to generate money with a 50 meter pool that they
wouldn't be able to do. with a 25 meter pool. Mr. MacHolda replied that he's convinced
that a 50 meter pool would be busy, however, the competitive swimmer is not used to
paying what it costs to operate the facility and it would need to be subsidized. Mr.
Keprios added that of all of the 50 meter pools he could find in the United States, not one
of them could break even. Mr. Klus asked if a 25 meter pool would be financially viable
to which Mr. MacHolda replied their facilities are very old and outdated and do not
provide enough lanes to have a true high school meet. Therefore, he feels that the plan
that is currently in place would work very well. Mr. Klus again asked if this is a viable
option or will they lose money on it. Mr. MacHolda responded that the only way pools
have become profitable is through the family aquatic centers. Mr. Murrin asked Mr.
MacHolda if he thinks there is going to be a.loss no matter'what size the pool is to which
Mr. MacHolda responded it will not be a revenue producer but than again neither are
basketball courts. Mr. Klus asked if the school will be responsible for the pool even
though the bond issue is offered by the City of Edina to which it was noted that is going
to be part of the discussion. From the start, the city's position has been that the City of
Edina is willing to put up all of the dollars to build new facilities and improve existing
ones on school property only if the school agrees to operate them on a 30 year agreement
and offer the community guaranteed access.
Mr. Herring indicated that it sounds like the referendum will be in the high 30's to low 40
million dollars. Mr. Keprios stated that the committee does not know what the final
dollar will be yet because there is still some editing that needs to be done.
Mr. Herring asked.what is the merchandising plan on all of this to which Mr. Keprios
replied they haven't gotten that far yet: Currently their job is to make a recommendation
to what and where facilities need to be placed and that there is a validated need. Their
report will be in both written and power point form and will be presented to the City
Council in January. Mr. Herring commented that he thinks one of the key things here is
to make sure that we go out and sell this to the community.
Mr. Klus asked for some insight on the proposed park projects and asked why some of
the playground equipment that was on the last referendum is listed again. Mr. Keprios
explained that it is for ADA.compliant access surfaces to playground equipment, which
was intentionally omitted from the 1996 referendum.
Mr. Herring asked if everything for the Aquatic Center has been included to which Mr.
Keprios replied yes. Mr. Keprios explained that the reason they are asking for 1.5 million
for that aquatic center is that we need a revenue source to fund our long -term capital
improvement plan. The plan is to use the aquatic center revenues to pay back that 1.5
million dollar loan on the non - interest bearing note that will become a large share of the
capital plan's funding source beginning in the year 2003.
Mr. Keprios commented that Mr. MacHolda has done so well this year that he could
make some pretty significant improvements without having to borrow any money. The
Aquatic Center has a very strong, positive cash flow and our thinking is that we are going
to need a source of revenue to fund our long -term capital improvement plan. Mr. Keprios
stated that they thought it made some sense to give the aquatic center 1.5 million dollars
up front to do all of their improvements right now. The Aquatic Center will then pay the
0
1.5 million back in time on a non - interest bearing note which will cost the aquatic center
less in the long -run while funding the general parks' capital improvement plan. Mr.
Murrin asked what would be done to which Mr. MacHolda gave a presentation last month
on what he would like to see accomplished at the pool. He noted that the big ticket is
replacing the water slide. He indicated that he would also like to introduce a new feature,
an inner tube ride. Mr. MacHolda indicated that he hopes to have a structural engineer
come out in the spring and assess it and see what we need to do just to make sure it's
operational for this year and make sure it's safe. He stated that he doesn't want to spend
any more money than he needs to because he plans to go forward with the water slide in
2001 whether or not the referendum passes. He explained that he will take the dollars
generated from 2000 -2001 and some short term finance dollars to get it done. Mr.
Herring suggested to Mr. MacHolda that he look into adding a third slide because no
matter how many slides there are there will still be huge lines. Therefore, for the
marginal additional cost to add a third slide would be good. Mr. MacHolda responded
that he will look into it. He then commented that he is real pleased with how the master
plan has turned out and whether there's a referendum or not he would like to show the
general public that they can expect this in 2002 or 2003.
Mr. Fredlund asked about the playground equipment at Van Valkenburg Park to which
Mr. Keprios responded that the plan is to finish off the little neighborhood park section of
the park near the water tower, which has been requested by the neighborhood for some
time.
Mr. Murrin asked if this will solve a lot of the problems that we were worried about
because of the last referendum to which Mr. Keprios replied he hopes so and also
commented that he believes that the community is going to be thrilled.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
John Murrin MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:00 P.M. Karla Sitek
SECONDED THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED.
7
January 4, 2001
Mr. Tom Ries
Realty Center
7600 Parklawn Avenue # 200
Edina, MN 55435 -5174
RE: Your letter of 12/29/2000
Dear Tom,
As usual, your ideas are good ones, and the City is currently working on
construction plans for Council approval involving the area regarding pedestrian
safety.
The current plans for construction include the following:
A. W. 77th Street from Parklawn to T. H. 100 (reconstruction with
sidewalk on the south side).
B. Parklawn from W. 77th to W. 70th (sidewalk construction on the
east side with traffic signal and appropriate turn lanes at W.
77th)
C. W. 76th from Parklawn to France Ave. (sidewalks on both sides -
north and south).
This construction should start in 2001 and be completed in 2002 subject
to Council approval.
Sincerely,
Francis J. Hoffman, P.E.
Director of Public Works
and City Engineer
FJ Tmsw
cc: Mayor Maetzold
Wayne Houle
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 826 -0379
456
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 273
Regular Meeting, January 15, 2001, 7:00 P.M.
Room 349, Edina Community Center
AGENDA
Determination of Quorum and Call to Order
Approval of Minutes of Meeting of December 5, 2000
Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting of December 14, 2000
HEARINGS OF INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS, AND PRESENTATION OF PE
ACTION
Page
233
Annual Election of Chairperson of the Board of Education
457
234
Annual Election of Officers
458
235
Reaffirmation of Policies
459
236
Designation.of Responsible Authority and Designation of
460
Data Practices Compliance Officials
237
2000 -2001 Board Committee Appointments
461 -463
238
Designation of the Official Newspaper
464
239
Designation of Depositories
465
240
Signatories on General Checking Account
466
241
Delegation of Authority to Make Electronic Funds
467
Transfers January 2001 through December 2001
242
Personnel Recommendations
468 -472
243
Master Agreement — Independent School District 273 and
473
The School Service Employees Union Local 284, appended
244
Approval of Expenditures Payable on January 15, 2001
474
245
Revised Policy 5117 — Students: School Attendance Areas
475 -477
246
Revised Policy 5117.1 — Students: School Enrollment
478 -480
and Mobility
247
Revised Policy 5118 — Students: Interdistrict Transfers
481 -482
248
Revised Policy 5118.1 — Students: School District
483 -484
Enrollment Options
249
Revised Policy 6163.1 — Instruction: Instructional Materials
485 -487
Centers (Renamed: Instructional and Media Center Resources)
250
Purchase of HP Laptop Computers for Students
488
251
Purchase of HP Laptop Computers for Staff
489
252
Purchase of Reason Computers for Staff
490
253
Gift from H. Ronald Berg Family
491
254
Gift from Terri and Jeff Leader
492
255
Gift from Steve and Kathy McLane
493
256
Gifts from Concord Parent Teacher Organization, 1999 -2000
494
257
Gift from Creek Valley Elementary PTA
495
258
Gift from Thomas E. Johnson
496
259
Donation from Target
497
260
Agreement to Accept Request to Retire 498 -504
261
Gift from South View Middle School Parent Council
505
262
Gift from Cornelia PTA
506
263
Gift from South View Student Activities
507
264
Gift from Normandale Elementary French Immersion Parent Organization
508
265
Gift from TCF National Bank
509
266
Gift from Lynne Morishita and Tom Amatrude
510
HEARINGS OF INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS, AND PRESENTATION OF PETI
REPORT
Sabbatical Leaves — Pamela Hermanson, Anne Jarvis, Colleen Raasch
Review and Comment on Potential City Facilities Referendum
Legislative Initiatives
Bus Garage Request for Proposals
INFORMATION
267 Expenditures Payable on December 11, 2000 511
268 Expenditures Payable on December'27, 2000 512
269 Enrollment as of December 22, 2000 513
270 Electronic Fund Transfers for the Period Ending 514 -515
December 31, 2000
271 Revised Procedure 5117.1 — Students: School Enrollment 516 -519
and Mobility
err*
:f
272
Revised Procedure 5118 — Students:- Interdistrict Transfers
520 -522-
273
Revised Procedure 5118.1 - Students: School District
5.23 -529
Enrollment Options
274
Revised Procedure 6163.1 — Instructional Materials Centers
530 -536
(Renamed: Instructional and Media Center Resources)
275
Revised Procedure 1312 — Community Relations, Complaints
537 -539
Concerning School Personnel /Instruction Materials
276.
Revised Procedure 6144 — Instruction, Controversial Issues
540 -542
In the Classroom
277
Overnight, Varsity Boys' and Girls' Nordic'Ski Team Trip
543
278
Overnight Boys' Varsity Basketball Trip
544
279
Edina Concert Orchestra Performing Tour to Chicago
545
280
Concert Choir Tour 2001
546
281,
Bel Canto Tour 2001
547
282
Recognition of Staff
548
Adjournment
* Persons who wish to address the Board are requested to complete and submit an appropriate form
to the Board Secretary prior to the designated hearing time. When, recognized, each individual shall
identify himself /herself and. the group represented, if any. He /She shall then state the reason for
addressing the Board and shall be limited in time at the discretion of the Board chair. Individual
employees of the School District or representatives of employee organizations shall have utilized
administrative procedures before making a request to address the Board.
JMS Homes: Nationally recognized for our innovation in
building and in our commitment to the communities we serve .
We crafted our reputation on the quality of our homes and the respect of our clients and peers.
We are pleased that our reputation has also earned us the attention of leading national magazines
such as Better Homes and Gardens, Professional Builder, and Builder.
National Awards
Health House: National Tiffany Award Recipient
The American Lung Association presented Jeffrey M. Schoenwetter with its prestigious National
Tiffany Award for his efforts in the conception and building of the Health House (1993 and 1994).
The Health House has significantly improved the specifications of construction for consumers by
emphasizing clean air, environmental issues, and moisture management techniques.
Open Space Program
JMS believes in helping to enhance the communities in which we live and work. JMS was recognized
for generosity and partnership from the City of Maplewood for its significant donation of acreage to the
City's "Trust for Public Land" in 1995.
JMS Homes has been repeatedly recognized for excellence by industry peers through the Builders
Association of the Twin Cities with the Trillium Award and the Reggie Award of Excellence for
Home Building. JMS has twice been a finalist in the HAP Award granted by BATC's 1,200 members.
Our homeowners reflect on JMS Homes...
Quality, commitment and integrity are the hallmarks of JMS Homes. It is for this reason
that we would recommend them to our friends and family without hesitation."
THE BENKOVICH'S
"JMS Homes wasn't chosen for the quality of their custom homes, though
E
exceptional, but rather for the quality of Jeffrey Schoenwetter and his
team's character. "
THE WHITE'S, A 3 -TIME CLIENT.
"We really love our new home and look forward to the reaction of our parents as
they see it for the first time this weekend. It sure feels like home to us!"
t THE BAUER'S
Please give us a call.
For a map and description of current homes and neighborhoods,
please contact JMS Homes at 952 - 949 -3630 or 1- 800 - 793 -2934.
JMS Homes
80 West 78th Street, Suite 133
Chanhassen, MN 55317'x'''' �•.
www.jms- homes.com
Wk TOR ..........
"From all of us at JMS
Homes, thank you for
considering us as your
builder. Please call
us at 952 - 949.3630 or
1- 800 - 793 -2934 for a
personal visit and a
tour of our current
projects."
About Jeffrey M.
Schoenwetter
As CEO of JMS
Companies, Jeff
currently serves on
the Board of Directors
of the Builders
Association of the
Twin Cities (BATC),
is active with the
Developer's Council,
and is a director of
the National
Association of
Home Builders.
JMS Homes
Experience the Difference
I
JMS Homes
Experience the Difference
'u
Live life to the fullest
in your new home.
"Home." The word that evokes feelings of warmth and safety...
plus a sense of unique personal expression and accomplishment
that doesn't exist anywhere else in our lives.
Our customers come to us because they want the most out of
life... especially in their new home.
Enjoy a home designed for you!
Sumptuous spa bathrooms... skylights... gourmet kitchens and wine
cellars... home offices and home entertainment rooms... all of these options
and so many more are available.
To help you create your dream, our team of experienced designers and
professional craftsmen will work with you to turn your thoughts into
well- designed living spaces.
A new, low- maintenance home affords you more time for your own lifestyle.
JMS Homes utilizes the latest techniques and products to create homes that
are a pleasure to live in.
With our help, if you can dream it — we can build it!
I-*,
N■;
V
AV—
Experience a process that makes
building your home easy and fun!
Established in 1985, JMS has been building homes in the Twin Cities area
and North Central Lakes Region. In that time, we have refined the building
process for our homeowners.
At JMS you will receive the personal attention you deserve while building
your dream home. Several options are available: you can select from
existing, pre - priced home plans, or complete, customized architectural plans.
Our commitment is to you.
Quality is a word that is often used, but rarely defined. We create quality
in everything we do through our commitment to you.
Ultimately, we measure quality in terms of your total satisfaction.
About JMS Development
One of Minnesota's premier land developers and contractors since 1985, JMS Development is an
active member of the communities it helps create.
A reputation for excellence...
We have a reputation for delivering excellence and making decisions that improve the quality
of life in the neighborhoods and communities in which we build and live.
Dedicated to preservation...
JMS believes in helping to enhance our communities. JMS was recognized for generosity and
partnership from the City of Maplewood during its "Open Space Preservation" referendum, due to
JMS's significant donation of acreage to the City's plan via the "Trust for Public Land" in 1995.
What a lender says about JMS Development...
"Excel Bank's relationship with JMS Development dates back to 1986. Over the years, I've been
impressed by their professionalism and long term commitment to quality. We greatly value the
opportunity to work with the JMS team in the future."
CRAIG BENTDAHL, PRESIDENT
Excel Bank
Signature developments include...
Residential — Single family
Huntingwood Farms — Maple Grove
Forest Meadow — Chanhassen
Park Place — Mendota Heights
Cold Water Creek — St. Michael
Timber Run — Baxter
Scenic Ridge — Minnetonka
Fall Creek — St. Michael
Residential — Multi- family
Boulder Ridge — Plymouth
Stone Ridge — Gull Lake
Cold Water Creek — St. Michael
Malibu Drive — Edina
For a complete list of current projects,
please contact JMS Development at
952 - 949 -3630 or 1- 800 -793 -2934.
Royal Meadow — St. Michael
Galpin Lake Woods — Shorewood
Knollwood Green — St. Louis Park
Eden Creek — Eden Prairie
Royal Oaks — Chanhassen
Salem Hills Farm — Inver Grove Heights
Commercial
Waterford Shopping Center, Bank,
Health Partners Clinic — Shorewood
Health Partners Clinic — Chaska
K Tel Warehouse — Minnetonka
8085 Office Building — Golden Valley
Eagan Professional Building — Eagan
JMS Affiliates
Insignia Development, Dave Sebold Vice President
Schoenwetter Family Partnership
JMS Development
80 West 78th Street, Suite 133
Chanhassen, MN 55317 ®® f
www.jms- homes.com
"All of us at JMS
Development look
forward to continuing
the great JMS
tradition of successful
development. Contact
us for a confidential
appointment and a
tour of our current
projects."
About Jeffrey M.
Schoenwetter
As CEO of JMS
Companies, Jeff
currently serves on
the Board of Directors
of the Builders
Association of the
Twin Cities (BATC),
is active with the
Developer's Council,
and is a director
of the National
Association of
Home Builders.
JMS Development
Experience the Difference
JMS Development
Experience the Difference
Turn to JMS Development...
To achieve your real estate development objectives.
Since 1985, our record of successfully delivering projects on time and
within budget is based on a team of professionals who anticipate the
specific needs of each property. Managing the successful process for
residential or commercial ventures is our expertise!
For efficiency.
Our successful approach saves time and money during each phase
of the development process. The process includes implementing controls,
design review, computerized cost estimating, and project management.
We integrate sales, marketing, financing, and final improvements.
For creativity.
We orchestrate the entire process. JMS has developed long- standing
professional relationships to build a "JMS team of experts ". We create a
seamless course through zoning, permits, platting, wetland studies,
engineering analysis, effective marketing, and sales. JMS Development
provides comprehensive land planning and development services.
For credibility.
We have forged relationships with numerous private investors, select
financial institutions, and commercial equity sources to ensure the
success of every project. Our credentials are highly rated in the
financial community.
"My family has sold three farm parcels to JMS.
The JMS team has been very professional in
handling the development processes and our
family's needs. We are so proud of their
neighborhoods, we live in one."
FRAN DEHMER
i uivnc�usc
Affiliated company: Prime Real Estate
Services, Ltd. (Residential & Commercial
sales and marketing)
1 "Build to Suit"
Land development (infill or on acreage) and
construction management. We provide com-
plete services for a variety of building projects.
1 Investment Real Estate
Land /Buildings — we own, manage, and lease.
Our team delivers excellent
communication.
As owners and developers of property we
understand the importance of communication.
Information flows every step along the way.
Frequent updates on project costs, cash flow,
progress payment reports, and detailed
construction schedules to ensure that the
objectives are achieved.