HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-05-03_COUNCIL PACKETAGENDA
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
MAY 3,1999
7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL
ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Adoption of the Consent Agenda is made by the Commissioners as to
HRA items and by the Council Members as to Council items. All agenda items marked with an asterisk ( *) 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 - Regular Meetings of April 5 and April 19,1999
Rollcall II. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS - as per pre -list dated 4/28/99, TOTAL: $7,956.14
III. ADIOURNMENT
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
* I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of April 19,1999 and Special Board of Review Meetings
of April 12,1999 and April 19,1999
II. PUBLIC HEARING OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS - Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by
Engineer. Public comment heard. Motion to close hearing. If Council wishes to proceed, action by
resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of the Council required to pass if improvement is
petitioned for; 4/5 favorable rollcall vote required if no petition
Rollcall A. BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD STREET RESURFACING CURB & GUTTER, IMP NO.
A -184
Rollcall B. SKYLINE DRIVE & BLOSSOM COURT STREET, IMP. NO. A -185
Rollcall C. HIGHLANDS PARK NEIGHBORHOOD STREET RESURFACING, IMP. NO. A -186
Rollcall D. ROSEMARY LANE STREET RESURFACING, IMP. NO. A -187
Rollcall E. EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD STREET RESURFACING, IMP. NO. A -188
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS - Affidavits of Notice by Clerk.
Presentation by Planner Public Comment heard. Motion to close hearing. Zoning Ordinances: First and
Second Reading require 4/5 favorable rollcall of all members of Council to pass. Waver of Second
Reading: 4/5 favorable rollcall of all members of Council to pass. Final Development Plan Approval of
Prol2er!y Zoned Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Conditional Use Permit:
3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass.
A. LOT DIVISION, 4404 and 4406 West 42nd Street, Fred & Robyn Green
* B. FINAL PLAT - HAUGLAND 1sT ADDITION, Interlachen Corporate Center, Haugland Company,
Generally Located Southwest Corner of Lincoln Drive and Th Street, Continued to May 17,1999
Alcall C. FINAL PLAT - NORTHVIEW 1sT ADDITION, Northview Development Company Corporation,
Generally Located West Of Londonderry Drive Extended
Rollcall D. REQUESTED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, English Rose Suites, 609 Blake Road
Agenda/Edina City Council
May 3,1999
Page 2
IV. AWARD OF BID
* A. Continue Cheyenne Circle Lift Station Improvement LS -14 until May 17,1999
* B. Treatment of Lakes and Ponds
* C. 911 Phone System
V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS
* A. Receive Feasibility Report & Set Hearing Date, Traffic Signal at Edinborough and 761h Street
(5/17/99)
* B. Change Order for Cahoy Construction - Well #10
C. Police Liquor Ordinance Enforcement Policy
* D. Set Hearing Date (6/1/99)
1. Brookview Avenue & West 561h Street Concrete Curb & Gutter Imp. B-096
2. Countryside Elementary Neighborhood Sidewalk Imp. S-076
3. Cornelia Elementary Neighborhood Sidewalk Imp. S -077
VI. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS
VII. CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS
VIII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES
IX. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL
X. MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEM
XI. FINANCE
Rollcall A. BOND SALE - General Obligation Utilities Revenue Bond, Series 1999A
Rollcall B. BOND SALE General Obligation Recreational Facility Refunding Bond Series 1999B
Rollcall C. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS as per Pre -List dated 4/28/99 TOTAL: $1,046,654.52
D. SET HEARING DATE - Amendments to Tax Increment Financing Plans
SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS
Mon
May 17
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Mon
May 31
MEMORIAL DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed
Tues.
Jun 1
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tues.
Jun 15
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Mon
Jul 5
INDEPENDENCE DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed
Tues
Jul 6
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBER.
Tues
Jul 20
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tues
Aug 3
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tues
Aug 17
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
RESOLUTION
City of Edina
BE IT. RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain
plat entitled "NORTHVIEW 1sT ADDITION ", platted by Northview Development
Corporation, and presented at the regular meeting of the Edina City Council May 3,
1999, is hereby granted final plat approval.
Adopted this 3rd day of May, 1999.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS
CITY OF EDINA )
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby
certify that the attached and foregoing City Council Minutes is a true and correct copy
of the Resolution duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its regular meeting of May
3,1999, and as recorded in the Minutes of said regular meeting.
WITNESS, my hand and seal of said City this 3rd day of August, 1999.
City Hall
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394
Debra A. Mangers, Clerk
(612) 927 -8861
FAX (612) 826 -0390
TDD (612) 826 -0379
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY HELD AT CITY HALL
APRIL 19, 1999 - 7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Faust, Hovland, Kelly, and Vice Chair
Maetzold.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Maetzold and
seconded by Commissioner Faust to approve and adopt the HRA Consent Agenda items as
presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
CLAIMS PAID Commissioner Hovland made a motion to approve payment of the HRA Claims
as shown in detail on the Check Register dated April 16, 1999, and consisting of one page
totaling $256,512.80. Commissioner Faust seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, Vice Chair Maetzold declared the meeting
adjourned.
Executive Director
11
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY HELD AT CITY HALL
APRIL 51999 - 7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Faust, Kelly, Maetzold, and Chair Smith.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED- Motion made by Commissioner Maetzold and
seconded by Commissioner Faust to approve and adopt the HRA Consent Agenda items as
presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF THE HRA MEETING. OF MARCH .15, 1999, APPROVED .Motion made by
Commissioner Maetzold and seconded by Commissioner Kelly approving the Minutes of the
Regular HRA Meeting of March 15, 1999.
_.Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
LETTER OF INTENT AUTHORIZED FOR KUNZ/LEWIS REDEVELOPMENT Executive Director
Hughes stated that on January 4,'1999, the HRA granted the West Metro Education Program
(WMEP) 60 to 90 days to submit detailed plans and proposals with respect to the Kunz Oil /Lewis
Engineering properties. The HRA directed that the cost of such plans and proposals be borne by
WMEP, but authorized the HRA to retain the services of a financial consultant to assist in the
evaluation of the TIF related issues. Executive Director'Hughes explained that staff retained Ehlers &
Associates for this purpose. He noted that the HRA had received two memorandums from Ehlers &
.Associates regarding project financing and tax increment financing analysis, in addition to a draft
"Letter of Intent For Eden Avenue Redevelopment." Executive Director Hughes introduced Bill Beard
of Beard Group, the development consultant retained by WMEP.
Bill Beard noted his firm is a small real estate brokerage development located in Hopkins. He added
he is also an Edina resident. Mr. Beard introduced John Litchy, Jerry Ritter, Charles Knight and
Frank Anderson from Setter Leach & Lindstrom; Terry Tofte, Edina School District Assistant
Superintendent of Elementary Education & WMEP Site Director; Bob Shadduck, Jerry's Enterprises;
David Kramer, Hennepin, County Library; Mary Swatosh, retired Edina Community Librarian; and
Mary Wattson, Edina Community Librarian.
Mr. Beard reviewed that in December of 1997 WMEP submitted two different proposals to the City of
Edina as part of the Requests For Proposals for the Kunz/Lewis site. One proposal was for a WMEP
School - located -only on - the- Kunz/Lewis site; and -a- second - proposal -was -a joint - venture with Jerry's
Foods that would have incorporated the Edina School Bus Garage and the Kunz/Lewis site. The
second proposal would have, moved the bus garage to the Kunz/Lewis site with Jerry's Foods
redeveloping the present bus garage site. Mr. Beard said that since December 1997 the WMEP
concept has- evolved to- include some -other public uses.in addition to the WMEP Magnet School. The
additional public uses include: A Senior Center, a Hennepin County Community Library, either two or
four gymnasiums, a performing arts theater (part of the school), the Edina School Bus Garage; and
enhancement to Sherwood Park (active and passive). The current proposal is a mixed use
development involving four units of government and a private sector developer. Mr. Beard said they
began to revise the ,concept site plan in a collaborative effort with all the project participants'
representatives including: Hennepin County Library, City Staff, Edina School District, and Jerry's
Foods. Once they developed a site plan addressing the issues of the parties involved, they began
exposing the plan to the community. Mr. Beard said that March 1, 1999, the development team met
with the neighbors whose property bordered the proposed development. On March 4, 1999, a larger
neighborhood meeting was held with about fifty in attendance. Mr. Beard reported that approximately
half the neighbors' questions dealt with the development and the other half dealt with WMEP; what
Minutes /Edina HRA /April 5, 1999
WMEP was about and how the proposed elementary school would function. At that point the
development team decided there was a need for additional informational meetings before coming to
HRA. WMEP held a community meeting on March 24, 1999. This was in addition to a presentation to
the Edina School Board and a meeting with the Edina HRA members and staff. Mr. Beard reported
that through this process they have received valuable feedback that has been and is still being
incorporated into the concept plan. Mr. Beard said the developers will be presenting a concept
_redevelopment plan for the Kunz/Lewis site. Included in the proposed redevelopment would also be
the following: 5244 and 5201 Eden Circle (the properties referred to as Tags and the Noonan -
Construction building), the Edina School Bus garage, and the Car Wash site, which would be the
portion of the redevelopment involving Jerry's Enterprises. Mr. Beard stated it was the developers'
hope that after the HRA viewed the Concept Plan and heard all the testimony, they would authorize
entering into a Letter of Intent and move forward into a formal review process. He indicated WMEP
intends to begin the rezoning and conditional use permit process almost immediately, ending up in
late August to early September - 1999: Construction would -begin for -the WMEP School during late
spring of 2000 with full project completion in the fall of 2001. Mr. Beard said that Jerry's would
proceed on a separate but similar timeline.
- -Chuck - Knight, -- Architect, -explained _the development -team attempted -to design a- "community wp_r
destination place incorporating the various components: WMEP School (including two gyms and a
performing arts center), Senior Center, Hennepin County Library, and the Edina School Bus Garage
He illustrated the proposed redevelopment using graphic boards depicting the WMEP School, Senior
Center, the Library, the theater and two gymnasiums. The Edina Bus Garage would be located
underneath the parking deck for the previously noted components. Mr. Knight said that Sherwood
Park would be enlarged and enhanced so that it could serve both the Richmond neighborhood and
the WMEP School. He added that an attempt would be made to screen the railroad and the parking
areas from the community. Mr. Knight reviewed the size of the various components in the WMEP
proposal as follows:
WMEP School Grades K -5 96,000 square feet
• Two full size gymnasiums 14,000 square feet - — - - - - - - - -
• 300 Seat Theater 9,600 square feet
• Senior Center 15,000 square feet
Library Hennepin County 20,000 square feet
School Bus Garage 56 space bus parking plus 4,400 square feet administration
Dr. Terry Tofte said he appreciated the opportunity to speak with the HRA regarding WMEP. He
assured the HRA that the total cost of the WMEP School component of the proposed development
will be borne by the State of Minnesota, causing no drain on the Edina School District or the
resources that come to the District. The operating cost for the WMEP School will, come as tuition
following students attending the school: Participation in -the WMEP- School is voluntary. No ma
student or student from any of the other eight member districts will be required to attend the school.
They will attend the school based on their family's perception that it meets the needs of a particular
student. The WMEP School will be overseen administratively by Edina School District's
Administration. -The WMEP School's academic standards, standards of decorum, and facility
standards will meet the Edina School District in all respects. Dr. Tofte noted that Edina's elementary
schools have been analyzed, and the WMEP School as ' proposed is comparable in size to the
existing schools, excluding the second gym and theater. Dr. Tofte said the site is adequate to house
the school, both relative to square footage and playground space. He pointed out that the City and
School District share facilities at both Creek Valley and Cornelia School. The WMEP School would
share Sherwood Park adding almost one acre to the park.
Commissioner Faust stated she felt the Kunz/Lewis site is very cramped for a school alone. The site,
even with the Tags and Noonen properties, still only has six acres. She pointed out that the two
schools that share parkland with the City have 17 and 14.53 acres of property. The WMEP School
Page 2
Minutes /Edina HRA /April 5, 1999
has less than half the space as the two schools that share parkland. Commissioner Faust felt the
comparison did not fit the situation. Dr. Tofte replied that the comparison he had presented looked at
programming space and with the two large gymnasiums the school captures adequate room for
recreational free time activities appropriate for elementary age students not available at the other
schools. He added that in balance the District staff feels the Kunz/Lewis site is more than adequate
to meet the needs of the proposed WMEP School and program.
Commissioner Kelly asked how much square footage the parking area contained. Frank Anderson
answered that there are 341 parking spaces and approximately 135,000 square feet.
Commissioner Faust said when she attended the neighborhood presentation, she heard that only '/2
acre of Sherwood Park would be used for the playground. Commissioner Faust stated she found it
surprising that the plan was to have 600 students using only' /2 acre of playground. Dr. Tofte said he
did not recall that comment. He added that the programming for the playground has not been
completed, so he does not feel he could give an accurate answer regarding how much of Sherwood
Park would be used for playground.
Commissioner Maetzold asked if the WMEP School intended to use the entire park for recreational
programming. Dr. Tofte replied that he believed the school would be using the park. Commissioner
Maetzold asked if any special amenities were envisioned for the park. Dr. Tofte said that the
programming has not been determined yet, but City Staff would be included in the planning.
Commissioner Maetzold asked what kind of academic curriculum is planned for the WMEP School.
Dr. Tofte replied that the intent is to use Edina's academic infrastructure to develop a program for the
WMEP School., They hope to use Edina's curriculum, standards for performance and systems of
assessments in the basic skill areas of reading, writing and mathematics. There will be
enhancements to the programs to make the school attractive as a magnet school. The things that
appear of greatest interest to the community are: enhanced arts programming as a way of delivering
multi - cultural education and also a commitment to the acquisition of a set -ond language.
Commissioner Maetzold asked if the proposed WMEP School campus size is more typical of an
urban elementary school setting. Dr. Tofte replied that the Kunz/Lewis site is between a typical urban
and suburban location.
Bill Beard reviewed the parking analysis compiled by Benshoof and Associates. The analysis
showed a peak demand of 299 parking spaces occurring between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. He
reported that with no cross - parking agreements; Edina Code requires 382 spaces on -site. Although
the site could provide the required 382 spaces, the proposal recommends 340 based on the
previously mentioned parking analysis. Mr. Beard explained the parking has been located on the site
to accommodate the different uses, so it actually is in three levels, with the top level accommodating
the Senior Center and Library. The middle area would park the theater and gyms, and the lower level
would house the school buses and offer circulation for school drop -offs and pick -ups. In addition, the
- parking -shown at the west - edge of the site does -not provide the required ten foot setback from the
property line. Mr. Beard explained the Benshoof firm was also directed to look at trip generation - -how
much more traffic the development would add to the area. The study's conclusions were separated
into A.M. Peak Period and P.M. Peak Period. The A.M. Peak Period shows approximately 150 more
trips coming into the site. During the P.M. Peak Period (5:00 -6:00) the development would generate
200 more trips. Mr. Beard reported that the traffic potential analysis projected that all components of
the development would need to be operating simultaneously to generate the peak trips. He noted
that in reality, not all components of the development would be fully utilized at the same time, so
most likely the traffic generated will not be as high as the traffic analysis shows.
Mr. Beard said that Benshoof also had reviewed the neighborhood impact and particularly Sherwood
Road as it connects to Link Road and Eden Avenue. Mr. Beard said the .study concluded that there
would not be any real impact on the neighborhood because of the redirection of the traffic on Eden
Avenue. The developer would add parking to Eden Avenue and Link Road if needed.
Page 3
Minutes /Edina HRA /April 5. 1999
Chair Smith noted the parking analysis shows that the greatest need for parking runs through 6:00
p.m. He. asked if the developer had given any thought to using parking to the north (perhaps from
Jerry's) instead of south towards Sherwood Park. Mr. Beard replied that the developer has had
discussions with Jerry's. Jerry's concept plan at this time provides for 72,000 square feet of office
and about 18,000 square feet of retail. The retail would be on the first level, and they would extend a
parking deck out over where the car wash is currently located for retail parking. Underneath this deck
there would be parking for the office building. The WMEP developers have had discussions about
the possibility of using Jerry's parking in case WMEP needs additional parking.
Commissioner Faust pointed out that the traffic analysis did not include any provision for day care
trip generation. She stated that in Edina about twenty percent of children in elementary school are in
day care provided by the school. These children are picked up between 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. This
would mean approximately 100 car trips in and out each day that have not been considered in any
analysis. Mr. Beard responded stating that the Benshoof study and the developers' proposal
concentrated on two different things. The developer looked at what Edina Code required and then
what were the current circumstances and the desired outcome. Mr. Beard said the development
proposal attempted to provide for the most conservative approach. He added that the Benshoof
study looked at A.M. and P.M. Peak_Period_.traffic- :counts; analyzed _the data,. and generated their
report.
Commissioner Faust stated she had a problem with the parking requirements as portrayed by the
development proposal.. She asked Planner Larsen to explain why the proposed expansion of
Cornelia School required more parking spaces than the smaller WMEP School. Planner Larsen
explained that the Cornelia School parking was calculated on the largest area of assembly used for
events. He added that both standards could apply, and it would be an HRA decision which to use for
the WMEP proposal.,
Commissioner Faust said that according to her calculations the development would require 450
parking spaces, not the 340 quoted by the proponent. Mr. Beard interjected that the WMEP proposal
contains- amenities (theater and additional gymnasium ) - the- community-desired at the location. if
these amenities become problematic to the development they can be removed. He cautioned that
the theater would most likely not demand independent parking of the school.
Chair Smith stated that the issue seemed to him not whether the site is short parking, but rather how
much of a shortage, if any, can be tolerated.
Commissioner- Faust pointed out that the traffic report stated twenty -four spaces cannot be used
during the daytime hours when they are most needed. These spaces are located in the bus turn-
around, which leaves an even greater shortage. Chair Smith acknowledged Commissioner Faust's
- - concern - and - noted- this - was - why -he -had suggested seeking additional parking north of Eden Avenue.
He believes that questions should be posed to the developer and then the developer should be
allowed to answer the concerns. Until this has happened, Chair Smith stated he would not discount
the proposal.
Commissioner Faust stated that according to Edina's regulations; the WMEP proposal would be 124
spaces short. She added that the Benshoof report stated on page nine that the layout of several the
parking rows and aisles would cause awkward circumstances and would have to be changed in the
final analysis. Commissioner Faust said this report is telling us even more parking will need to be
eliminated to manage the traffic flow, causing an even greater parking shortage than the 120 space
shortage already apparent.
Chair Smith asked if anyone from Hennepin County would like to address the development.
Executive Director Hughes introduced David Kramer, Hennepin County Library Board. Chair Smith
stated his understanding that the HRA would construct a new Hennepin County Community Library
Page 4
Minutes /Edina HRA/April 5, 1999
on the Kunz/Lewis site, then the City would purchase the existing Hennepin County Community
Library as essentially a land trade for the new building. David Kramer stated the Hennepin County
Library Department is very interested in the project. He added that Charles Brown, Hennepin County
Library Director; was unable to attend due to illness. However, Mr. Kramer said that Hennepin
County views the WMEP proposal as an opportunity to provide better library service to Edina
citizens. The new library would be larger and have different types of programming utilizing modern
technology. Mr. Kramer added that Library staff has met with Commissioner Tambornino, and she
also supports the project.
Commissioner Kelly asked if the figures from the WMEP proposal are advisory only. He understood
the proposal to say that the HRA would construct a new library at an approximate cost of
$2,800,000.00 with an understanding between the library and City, that the construction costs of the
new library would be roughly equivalent to the appraised value of the existing library. Executive
Director Hughes said the new library would be around 20,000 square feet, while the existing library is
approximately - 14,000 square feet and would appraise at far less than -the construction cost of the
new library.
Commissioner Faust asked if tax increment financing (TIF) funds could be used to building a library.
Executive Director Hughes replied that a library could be built with TIF funds. Chair Smith clarified
that the law assumes a perceived benefit to the public from having a library built.
Mr. Kramer added that the existing library is approximately 16,000 square feet. Commissioner Kelly
asked if Hennepin County had an appraisal for the existing library. Mr. Kramer stated that an
appraisal had been completed in late 1998, and the existing library's value was $1,100,000.00.
Commissioner Kelly asked where the proposed $2.8 million construction costs have been derived.
Mr. Kramer replied that Hennepin County has been using $130 per square foot for construction when
a new library is constructed by the County. The WMEP proposal's library could be less, due the
shared development costs.
Commissioner Kelly expressed concern over the HRA spending $2.8 million to construct a new
library and receiving only a building worth $1.1 million. Executive Director Hughes replied that this
was one of the issues to be decided by the HRA. He added that using TIF fund that are
approximately thirty -five percent County tax dollars to build the new library would perhaps help
balance the inequities.
Chair Smith pointed out the HRA has in the past participated financially in development, such as
building parking ramps in the 50`h and France area. He added that many dollars have been spent
enhancing the public good. The policy issue the HRA must decide is whether or not and how much
involvement the HRA should have in the WMEP development. Commissioner Kelly said he does not
have a problem with HRA participation, but he does have concern with swapping a Mercedes for a
Ford.
Chair Smith asked that a spokesperson from Edina Schools indicate their position on the School Bus
Garage portion of the proposal. Dr. Tofte said his understanding was that the Board of Education is
interested in moving the Edina School Bus Garage, if and only if the WMEP project moves forward. If
the. WMEP project moves forward, the School Board would be committing the District's capitol
resources to cover the excess between dollars realized from the sale of the existing bus garage and
construction of a new garage.
Commissioner Maetzold asked if a new bus garage were constructed would the school buses be
fueled on site. Dr. Tofte answered that he believed the City had indicated a willingness and ability to
allow fueling of the buses at their public works locations. Executive Director Hughes confirmed that
the possibility was under investigation of allowing buses to fuel at the City's facility that has been
newly constructed. The fueling site size and card access capability to account for the fuel would
accommodate both users.
Page 5
Minutes /Edina HRA/April 5, 1999
Commissioner Kelly expressed his disappointment that Dr. Dragseth or a representative did not
attend the meeting to discuss the proposal. If the School District felt so strongly about the WMEP
development they should appear and discuss the issues. He continued that his understanding had
been that the School District was so interested in seeing the WMEP proposal move forward that they
were willing to give the existing bus garage to the City to further the development. Now, in looking at
the initial financial analysis, he found the School District would be paid $1,020,000 for the existing
bus garage.
Chair Smith 'stated he understood the $1,020,000 to be a pass- through and not a City or HRA
expense. The HRA was merely facilitating passing the title from one development participant to
another.
Commissioner Maetzold noted that Dr. Dragseth was not present because he was accompanying
Edina High School band students on a trip to Hong Kong..
Chair Smith noted the last element of the WMEP proposed development was the City of Edina Park
Department's Senior Center. Executive Director Hughes said that the City had some pre- design
studies from an earlier time. Using the studies, a typical senior center would require approximately
15,000 square feet. This would be a fifty percent increase over what the Senior Center located in the
Edina Community Center uses. The program elements were developed in consultation with the
Senior Advisory Council. It is also believed that the advantages of constructing a Senior Center
adjacent to-a library and theater add considerably to the usable space. The $1,800,000 estimated
cost was based on these pre- design studies (completed about a year ago).
Commissioner Faust questioned if TIF funds could be used to build the Senior Center. Executive
Director Hughes answered that TIF monies may fund construction of a Senior Center.
Chair Smith asked Bob Shadduck, Jerry's Enterprises, to tell the HRA conceptually what Jerry's
involvement would be in the WMEP proposal. Chair Smith also asked Mr. Shadduck to comment on
the pass- through of the school bus garage site purchase to the private developer. Bob Shadduck,
Jerry's Enterprises, stated that his organization has been actively involved with the WMEP group on
the Concept Plans. They have also hired Setter Leach to do some concept work for Jerry's
Enterprises. Mr. Shadduck stated he believed it would be premature to discuss economics at this
time. He said they are very interested in working on the project. Mr. Shadduck added that his
organization believes the redevelopment is workable and would like to move ahead if they have a
chance.
Chair Smith clarified that there has been no incentive discussed between the HRA and Jerry's, and
that if Jerry's Enterprises moves forward in working out a deal with the Edina School District, the City
would not be involved in purchasing the bus garage. The HRA may facilitate the purchase, but would
not fund it. Mr. Shadduck confirmed that nothing had been offered or discussed by the HRA. Jerry's
has been asked if they are interested, and they are stating this desire to be involved.
Commissioner Kelly asked Mr. Shadduck if he was aware of any appraisals existing on the bus
garage. Mr. Shadduck replied that he did not know of any existing appraisals and that Jerry's had not
done any either. Executive Director Hughes noted that the HRA had done some value opinions on
the bus garage about three or four years ago. He added that the Ehlers' cash flows were an attempt
to show what would be the maximum TIF dollars that can be absorbed by the Grandview District. For
this reason, it look's like properties such as the bus garage would be purchased for a price higher
than they would be resold to a developer. However, staff has not made any negotiations; this was put
together for illustration only. The HRA would need to make a policy decision, then direct staff in what
approach they wish to pursue.
Page 6
Minutes /Edina HRA /April 5, 1999
Chair Smith asked if when parking was previously installed on the north side of Eden Avenue, was it
done only with HRA funds or was there participation by the property owners. Executive Director
Hughes replied that he believed there was participation in the form of a special assessment of
approximately twenty per cent of the cost of the parking. Bob Shadduck confirmed this was correct.
Chair Smith asked if the parking by Jerry's was considered public parking. Executive Director
Hughes confirmed that the parking installed behind Jerry's was considered public parking. Chair
Smith commented that this could . be. one way to solve the parking shortage from the WMEP
proposal. - - -
Commissioner Faust expressed concern using the north side of Eden Avenue for parking the WMEP
site. She said if the north side of Eden would be developed with. a maximum commercial
development, it will need all its own parking. Letting the WMEP site park on the north side would not
be feasible because the parking would be needed at the same time.
-- Chair Smith noted.the - participants in the proposed redevelopment were: - -WMEP with the School,
gymnasiums and a theater; Edina School District with a new bus garage site on the south and selling
their existing bus garage site to a private developer; City of Edina with a Senior Center and
Sherwood Park expansion; and finally Hennepin County with a new library. Chair Smith asked if
anyone was available from Ehlers & Associates. Executive Director Hughes said that Rusty Fifield
was in attendance. He directed the HRA to the preliminary findings and conclusions on page 3 of Mr.
Fifield's memo, subject WMEP. Project, dated April 2, 1999.
Chair Smith suggested beginning by discussing the sources and uses of funds as outlined in Mr.
Fifield's memo; and. asked what made up- the "Improvement/Contingency" amount of $1,200,00.
Executive Director Hughes stated it would include the cost of upgrading the streetscape on Eden
Avenue, contingencies on the project, and any soft costs associated with things such as
redevelopment agreements. He said he used an 'estimate of ten percent of the total project in that
category. -
Chair Smith asked if Mr. Fifield's report took into consideration the HRA's holding costs for acquiring
the Kunz/Lewis site. Mr. Fifield replied that in the cash flow analysis the holding costs were factored
into the report. He continued stating that there was a repayment of the internal borrowing that the
HRA incurred acquiring the Kunz/Lewis properties. The debt is repaid with interest as part of the
overall flow of funds for the project. The funds used to make the debt payment would be from the
sale of the property to WMEP and the issuance of bonds. Mr. Fifield added that Ehlers' memos are
very broad and general. Because of the preliminary nature of the project, the finance plan is very
conservative in its assumptions. Ehlers has attempted to assess the maximum capacity to participate
in the project and also identify the key points of the transaction, allowing for understanding of how
these points need to come together to have the project successful for the HRA.
-
-- Mr. -- - Fifield - said - Ehlers - had - attempted to preliminarily -- identify - the- elements - -where- -the - HRA -would
spend money, the sources of revenue received, and put this information into a cash flow that would
span the life of the HRA's financial commitment to the project. The assumptions used were very
conservative- -the Tax Increment projections assumed the existing values in the Grandview TIF
District with no growth for either new development or the inflation of property, a reasonable estimate
of what might be developed on the bus garage site when it is redeveloped, and as the analysis points
out that redevelopment is an essential part of the project. The HRA's participation would not be
financially feasible simply on the basis of the existing TIF in the Grandview District, but would rely on
a public /private venture to cause the Kunz/Lewis, Noonan and Tags properties to be developed as
WMEP is proposed and then private development to occur on the current bus garage site. The
combination of those resources would then provide the results that were presented in the Ehlers'
memo. Mr. Fifield highlighted the results graphically for the HRA, showing the results of the cash flow
analysis accompanying the Ehlers' memo. The Grandview TIF District maintains strong cash
balances, but towards the end of its life, the balances start to dip down to the $600,000 - $800,000
level, which is a significant amount of money, but given the changes seen in the property tax system,
Ehlers believes those levels become minimum levels for prudent cash flow protection since the HRA
Page 7
Minutes /Edina HRA/April 5, 1999
is being asked to incur debt to facilitate the WMEP project. Ehlers believes that the cash flow
projections are conservative and demonstrate the elements of a project that is financially feasible for
HRA participation.
Commissioner Maetzold asked if the bond issue would be totally amortized by the year 2010; how
were the potential values derived in the analysis; and how would the City finance the funding for the
- acquisition of the-existing library or perhaps the construction of third gymnasium on the WMEP site.
Mr. Fifield said the last bond payment would-be February of 2010. Executive Director Hughes
explained that the values used in the analysis were estimated market values from the City's
Assessing Department. Executive Director Hughes explained that the cost of acquiring the library,
remodeling it and City Hall would likely be the subject of some additional debt. It could possibly be in
the form of HRA lease /revenue bonds or if the HRA so desired could be General Obligation Bonds
following a referendum. Executive Director Hughes said financing a third gym could be financed in
--the same wayland that it -is still -a little too early to tell - if an additional° gymnasium -would be tax
increment feasible. Gyms are eligible, but at this time it is difficult to tell if the District could support its
financing. Commissioner Maetzold asked if a referendum is the only alternative to finance the City.'s
portion of the project. Executive Director Hughes said that could be one alternative, but it would not
-be -the only one available. -
Commissioner Faust stated that financing has been her main concern about the entire project. She
said that there appears to be a consensus that the library and senior center are wanted. Then taking
the first page of the Ehlers' report she divided the Kunz/Lewis property into a per acre price of
$344,000. Member Faust said that allocating the library and senior center three acres leaves WMEP
with six acres using Kunz/Lewis,,Noonan, and TAGS. According to these calculations, WMEP would
pay the HRA $.3,000,000, then the HRA would pay $4,444,000 for the same property. The Edina
School District would give up two acres for the existing bus garage site and acquire another two
acres on the other side of the street. The HRA paid $750,000 for the two acres, and the School
District would pay the HRA $280,000 for the same two acres if the assumptions are correct.
Commissioner Faust said the Ehlers' report assumed that the HRA would acquire the bus garage for
$1,020,000 and sell it to Jerry's for $700,000. Based on her - calculations, the - City- would -be -short, just
on land costs, $2,214,020. Mr. Fifield acknowledged the difficulty of interpreting his report. He
explained the methodology that Ehlers used to determine that there would be sufficient money to pay
for all the costs presented in the proposal. Mr. Fifield said that in the context of cash flow analysis,
Ehlers had laid out all of the money that would be expended, all of the monies that would be
received, and all monies necessary to amortize the money borrowed to pay for things that are not
paid up- front. That analysis indicated that by the time all of the obligations are satisfied, the HRA
would still have an amount of money in excess of half a million dollars left.
Commissioner Faust said that she was surprised that the HRA would need a bond in the amount of
$7;140;000- and - asked- how -the HRA -would pay -the bond -back. Mr. Fifield replied -the bond would be
paid from the existing Grandview TIF District Revenue and the new TIF revenue expected to be
generated from the redevelopment of the bus garage site. Commissioner Faust clarified that the
monies would not be coming from the taxpayers. Mr. Fifield affirmed her understanding, stating that
none of the money that was contemplated in the finance plan would be coming from the taxpayers.
Commissioner Faust asked if Ehlers had analyzed the potential tax revenue for each of the proposed
developments the HRA previously received for the Kunz/Lewis site. Mr. Fifield answered that it was
his understanding the HRA had received the analysis Ehlers had prepared for the property being
developed on both a taxable, and a tax exempt basis. Executive Director Hughes explained that
Ehlers had been asked to test the affordability of the WMEP proposal. He explained that Ehlers used
numbers given to them by staff to attempt to show the feasibility of the project if the maximum tax
increment was going into the deal. They were asked if the project which was totally tax exempt would
still be affordable from a TIF standpoint. The conclusion of the analysis was that the project could be
feasible, but only if more taxable property is developed within the district. The taxable development
Page 8
Minutes /Edina HRA /April 5, 1999
that Ehlers assumed was the one Jerry's is contemplating This= development would generate taxes
based upon 92,000 square feet of area. Ehlers was asked to analyze whether or not there was
enough increment coming out of the district as.it exists today to finance the project. The answer was
no, more private development is needed somewhere in the TIF district to generate enough cash flow
to pay for all. the public costs. He pointed out that the numbers used in the cash flows are not
negotiated numbers but only hypothetical numbers designed to test the affordability of the district.
Chair Smith discussed the implications of developing the property without using TIF. It was pointed
out that the Ehlers' memo on the subject. Property Tax Implications .was based upon the assumption
that the Grandview.Tax Increment District ceases after 2010. Without use of TIF funds to develop the
property, it was estimated the area would generate approximately $315,000 annually in taxes due to
fiscal disparities. Using TIF funds in the district would allow capture of approximately $1,000,000
annually until 201 b Jo be used for the redevelopment's public projects allowed under Tax Increment
Financing law.
Commissioner Faust maintained her belief that there would be other allowable uses for the TIF funds
generated by the Grandview District if the WMEP proposal does not move forward.
Commissioner Kelly...asked if the increment -from-the-Grandview.-District had ever been-pooled with
other districts as with some of the TIF districts. Executive Director Hughes explained that the
Grandview TIF District has always been a standalone district and had never been pooled.
Commissioner Maetzold commented that if the discussion is talking about properties north and south
of Eden Avenue, it should be realized that without moving the school bus garage there is little
likelihood of the redevelopment occurring on the north of Eden.
Chair Smith asked for a list of what tax increment monies may be used to fund. Executive Director
Hughes replied- that tax increment may be used to: acquire land within the redevelopment area;
public redevelopment costs including the costs of improving rights -of -way, utilities, parking facilities
and the like; social, cultural, and recreational facilities such as the senior center or the library. TIF
funds cannot be used for: bricks and mortar of private buildings; -lands or-buildings used- primarily for
the conduct of government (i.e. the new school bus garage, or acquiring the existing library next to
City Hall).
Commissioner Kelly stated that from the beginning he thought the proposal has some nice features;
however, he expressed concern with the numbers reported this evening. He added he understood
the dollars were estimates and projections. He- stated that he believes the acquisition costs should be
-borne. proportionally to the .land occupied. by the school. According to Commissioner Kelly's
calculations that would be 73.5% borne by the WMEP School'and Edina School District and 26.5%
borne by the City. Commissioner Kelly stated as he understood the project, WMEP and Edina School
- District wanted the first right of refusal for the property. In return, they will need to give the HRA the
current bus garage and acquire the land (for the HRA's cost). The construction project will include a
performing arts center and.two gymnasiums that the City would be able to use.. Further, if the WMEP
program were discontinued, the property would revert-to either the School District or the City. This
- would be how. Commissioner -Kelly -would expect the project to move forward. He said that according
to his calculations the school's portion of the property would be 96,600 square feet and that the
library and senior center would occupy 35,000 square feet. These numbers do not factor in either the
parking or the park. This calculates to a land break -out of 73.5 percent for the school and 26.5
percent for the City. If this is applied to land acquisition costs less the estimate for what the developer
would pay, $5,444,000 appears to be the land acquisition cost. Based on the figures shown to the
HRA, WMEP and the School District are not paying their 73.5 percent. He calculated that they would
be about $735,000 short. Commissioner Kelly stated he expected the money to be made up by
WMEP and or the School District and not borne by the City.
Commissioner Kelly added that he would 'not authorize signing a Letter of Intent without a term that
adequately reflects the agreement with respect to the deed restriction. If WMEP is discontinued as a
Page 9
-- Minutes /Edina HRA/April 5. 1999
program and the building ceases to be operated as a WMEP School, the property must come back
to either the City of Edina or the Edina School District. Look at the project to assure that the ,City is
not shouldering an unfair portion of its financial burden.
Chair Smith asked if Commissioner Kelly had factored in parking or parkland expansion.
Commissioner Kelly answered no. Chair. Smith asked if the calculations had included the City's right
to use either the theater or gymnasiums. Commissioner Kelly replied that he had not because his
understanding of the proposal was that the City would have the right to use the theater and
gymnasiums in exchange for allowing the developer first right of refusal on the land.
Commissioner Maetzold stated he shared Commissioner's Kelly concern regarding the value of the
property, especially since the City would need to acquire additional property. However, he does not
have a precise amount or ratio in mind. He stated he believed he would provide credit for the
gymnasiums and the performing art center. Also he believed there is real benefit to the cash flow that
will be generated by the development of the north side of Eden Avenue. He said he must think
through the give and take the project would have for the City. Perhaps, he would be willing to enter
into some preliminary negotiation relative to the land value. Commissioner Maetzold added that he
agreed with Commissioner Kelly regarding the modification to the Letter of Intent to reflect the deed
restriction in the event the WMEP School ceases to- operate. Commissioner Maetzold also stated the
Letter of Intent should reflect who has jurisdiction for management of the gymnasiums and the
theater.
Commissioner Faust stated that the School District was correct in stating at their community
meetings that they would not bear any costs related to WMEP. She believes the City would be
bearing all the costs (for example between $735,000 and $2,000,000 on land acquisition) and the
City would also give up TIF funds that could be used for many areas in the Grandview District where
the ten million dollars could be spent. Commissioner Faust also believes the site would be over
developed. There would be no green space, it would be about ten acres of pure concrete: She does
not believe that the proposal would be the optimum development for the property. Commissioner
Faust expressed grave concern over the parking- shortage- she -sees in,the- proposal. -- She has great
reservations about the proposed development.
Public Comment
Lisa Finsness, 4536 Tower Street, said in her opinion more long range planning was needed. The
site has not been designed with either pedestrian or bike paths. She advocated instead of a Senior
Center, a multi - generation center. Ms. Finsness stated she believed moving the Police Department
to the current library site is short sighted. She urged the HRA to consider more alternatives before
jumping into this decision.
- -Art Heiam, -- 5205 - Richwood - Drive, said he wanted to -hear answers to- his - questions before the City
made a commitment to WMEP. Mr. Heiam wanted to know if the WMEP proposal was the only
proposal being considered and if traffic issues have been reviewed and resolved.. Mr. Heiam added
that Frauenshuh has passed handouts in his neighborhood. Chair Smith explained that at this time
the WMEP proposal is the finalist being reviewed. He noted that if the proposal does not move
forward, the City would most likely entertain other development proposals. Engineer Hoffman .stated
that part of redevelopment review includes an analysis of traffic issues, so this would be done if the
WMEP redevelopment moves forward.
Pat Stinson, 5236 Richwood Drive, expressed concern relative to parking and the financial impact of
the proposed redevelopment. He urged the HRA to keep more developers available and suggested
looking at more ideas.
Ardis Wexler, 4913 Larkspur Lane, stated she currently chairs the Edina Human Relations
Commission, and in her opinion it has become evident in the last few years that the facilities
Page 10
Minutes /Edina HRA /April 5, 1999
proposed by the WMEP are needed in Edina. Ms. Wexler added. that she also has served as
president of parent teacher. organizations at the elementary, junior and senior high level with Edina
Schools. She stated this experience has helped her to favor the educational aspects of WMEP. She
continued that professionally, she believes TIF financing can be attained for the WMEP proposal.
Ms. Wexler acknowledged that problems still need to be resolved with the WMEP proposal, but
urged the HRA to approve the project and move it forward.
John Wanninger, 6900 Paiute Drive, urged that the HRA only use the Kunz /Lewis site for the best
and highest use of the property. In Mr. Wanninger's opinion that would be a commercial venture, not
a public use. He suggested that a better location for gymnasiums would be adjacent to the Braemar
Arena where considerable unused land exists. Mr. Wanninger suggested that public facilities should
be constructed on land that already is tax exempt, such as parkland or school locations. He also
asked if an analysis has been completed of the other twelve proposals the City received. Chair Smith
stated that the two gymnasiums and theater are in the proposed project because the City asked that
-they be included.—
Mark Ritter, 6338 Valley View Road, stated he was a tenant at 5224 Eden Circle. He asked what
consideration had been given to relocation of the tenants at the Noonan and Tags buildings. Mr.
Ritter questioned the value of 5224 Eden Circle. He noted it was stated as $720,000, but in his
opinion it should be much higher. Mr. Ritter added that there are five Edina businesses located in the
building that will have a difficult time relocating. Chair Smith replied that the value was not an
appraised value, but rather the estimated market value from the City's Assessing Department. Chair
Smith explained that the proposal is still in its very early stages and values have yet to be
investigated, but an appraisal will be completed when necessary. Executive Director Hughes added
that if the project moves forward, then the required relocation would be pursued as needed.
Commissioner Kelly questioned whether the value stated for the Noonan property was an assessed
value or an appraised value. Executive Director Hughes replied that the value was not from an
appraisal, but the assessed value.
Nick Boosalis, 5704 Woodland Lane, questioned the parking issue for the WMEP proposal. Mr.
__ Boosalis asked -if the City allows-private developments to -" borrow " - parking -from- adjacent - sites. He
added that he is'also a tenant of the Noonan property and stated that in his opinion, as a real estate
developer of fifteen years, the value of 5244 Eden Circle should be at least $1,200,000. Executive
Director Hughes replied the City's Zoning Ordinance permits leasehold parking off the main site to
satisfy parking requirements, for example such the Edinborough Park and office building where
parking is shared through an easement arrangement.
Kathy Iverson, 5410 York Avenue, stated the WMEP project has a great appeal for her. Ms. Iverson
said from the community standpoint; the theater is needed for parent forums. The Edina High School
auditorium seats 700, while parent forums run between 100 -200. The 300 -seat theater would be
ideal for this need. Ms. Iverson pointed out an article in the daily paper regarding brain power in
Minnesota. She stated that Edina is being called upon to take a look at our potential influence in the
Metropolitan area, in terms of really developing quality educational programs for all our children. Ms.
Iverson added that Edina needs this development and ,questioned whether the Edina Friends of the
Library have taken a stand. Ms. Iverson noted that she believes that Senior Citizens have indicated a
willingness to share the use of their space with some flexibility.
Jane Fuegner, 5225 Kellogg Avenue, asked if there was any idea of a time frame when the proposal
would be voted on by the HRA. She asked if the City.. would wait until after the legislative session
ends. Chair Smith replied affirmatively, adding that the Letter of Intent would give weight to the
legislative appeal.
Elaine Peterson, 5236 Edenmoor Street, voiced concern about Sherwood Park. She does not want
the WMEP School in the Richmond neighborhood. The City should wait to see if the magnet schools
are feasible. Ms. Peterson expressed concern that the WMEP school will bring an increased demand
for police services, and that traffic will increase. Chair Smith reminded Ms. Peterson that the Edina
Page 11
Minutes /Edina HRA /April 5, 1999 --
HRA will be reacting to a land: use proposal, not acting as educational policy makers. He added that
he could not see why there would be any increased demand,for police service and that traffic will be
rerouted because of the development and handled in the best way feasible for the location.
Ann Olk, 5315 Pinewood Trail, expressed concern regarding the density. Ms. Olk said with the
amount of brick and mortar and lack of green space, the development will be bursting at the seams.
Six hundred- _children in the WMEP School w_ ill tax the neighborhood park. Ms. Olk urged the HRA to
think of the impact on the neighborhood that will live with it on a daily. basis. She stated the
development will sit at the entrance to a neighborhood and it is too large. The traffic will be
horrendous. Chair Smith reminded that the WMEP proposal is just one of many that have been
reviewed for the Kunz/Lewis site. He noted that previously an office development. had received
approval, but did not move forward because the developers chose not to proceed, adding he was
unsure whether the neighborhood approved the office concept. Commissioner Faust commented
that she was on, the Planning Commission when-the. office development , was approved and the
neighbors had supported the development.
Darleen Roach Bastian, 5257 Richwood Drive, stated she is not sure the WMEP School is needed in
-Edina.-Ms. Bastian added she liked the proposed Senior Center and library, but does not think Edina
needs the WMEP School. Ms. Bastian would support a multi -use development. However, traffic on
Eden is terrible and the proposed redevelopment will not help the situation. Ms. Bastian suggested
the City look at other proposals as modules for development, using components of the various
proposal to formulate a sound general plan. Then TIF dollars could be used to finance the
development. She urged the HRA not to sign the Letter of Intent and take more time to review the
proposal.
Bill Marty stated he has a chiropractic practice in the building at 5244 Eden. Mr. Marty said his
practice has been in the Noonan building for approximately ten years and if the WMEP proposal is
built, he will have a very difficult time relocating. He expressed concern over the potential loss of the,
value of his leasehold. improvements and the potential traffic issues on Vernon Avenue. Mr. Marry
said there are many seniors in the area that travel to Jerry's for their shopping needs and believes
that more evaluation of traffic is needed.
HRA Discussion /Action
Chair Smith explained that the HRA had asked the staff to prepare a non - binding Letter of Intent that
would be circulated to the previously stated participants in the proposed development. There are two
elements members of the HRA have identified that need amendments to the draft Letter of Intent: 1)
Use of the Facilities and management of same; and 2) Reversionary right to the WMEP facility
should it cease operation as a magnet school. The bottom line to the Letter of Intent is that if the
HRA does not see the benefit and the ability of the City to make the development happen, -then there
- -will -be no- deal.- Chair Smith -noted that he - believed- anchors-for- -the- site would- be -a -- senior- center and
library. If WMEP is not a part of the development, a commercial development. that includes the senior
center and. library will be the type of development Edina citizens have come to expect. Chair Smith
said that currently WMEP is on the top of the list for developers, but it will only stay there by its own
actions -not those of the HRA.
Member Maetzold made a motion to adopt the Letter of Intent and Member Kelly seconded the
motion. Chair Smith asked for any amendment to the Letter of Intent as it was drafted.
Commissioner Kelly moved amending the Letter of Intent as previously stated. Chair Smith
reiterated that the previously stated amendments included: 1) management (use and scheduling) of
the gymnasiums and theater and 2) Reversionary right to the WMEP facility if the school ceases
operation as a magnet school. Chair Smith seconded the amendment.
Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Nay: Faust
Page 12
. Minutes /Edina HRA /April 5, 1999
Amendment carried on a 3 -1 vote.
Commissioner Maetzold questioned whether or not the Letter of Intent should be amended to include
a more equitable sharing of the land acquisition costs. Commissioner Kelly agreed with amending
the Letter of Intent to reflect an equitable sharing of land costs. He believes this is even more
important now that he knew the values stated are assessed and not appraised values. He continued
that. the Letter is non - binding and states that it is not a contract. Commissioner Maetzold said he
raiss this as a question so that all parties are aware of the HRA's position on the land acquisitions.
Chair Smith agreed that the HRA's position should be incorporated into the Letter of Intent, but
suggested that a broader statement of the position that the HRA must either see a pro -rata sharing of
the land costs or WMEP must make a case for benefit to the City.
Commissioner Faust said that she thought the benefits were a done deal. The only reason the City
would participate in the project was because of the benefits. Commissioner Kelly commented that the
pro -rata sharing of land costs- could -be stated -in the Letter of-Intent.
Commissioner Maetzold made a motion that the Letter of Intent be amended to reflect the
HRA's desire for a pro rata sharing of land acquisition costs by the participants in the project
and Member Kelly seconded the motion.
Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Nay: Faust
Amendment carried on a 3 -1 vote.
Commissioner Faust stated that according to the auditors; everything must run perfectly. The
amounts stated by Ehlers must be adhered to perfectly or the project will not work. The cash flow will
not work. The building that will be built by Jerry's must be a certain number of square. feet, must be
completed by a certain time, and also must be constructed for the exact dollars stated or the finances
will not work. She stated that she could not vote for something that she believes from the beginning
will not work.
Commissioner Kelly stated that he does not support - the -WMEP- Program, -that instead, - he -supports
neighborhood schools, and in his opinion, the WMEP approach is going in the wrong direction. He
raised the concern before that he would like to see WMEP establish a track record before building
another school. Commissioner Kelly said that in spite of his opinion he would support the proposal
because it addresses several civic concerns that were expressed to him when he ran for the City
HRA. He supports the library and senior center, thinks that the theater would be a nice amenity, and
added that Edina desperately needs gymnasiums. For those reasons Commissioner Kelly believes
the WMEP development is a good development. He added that most importantly the School District
has pointed out that if there is no WMEP then there will be no relocation of the Edina Bus Garage.
Commissioner Kelly noted that for many years he has thought the Bus Garage site to be a blight and
- in need of- redevelopment in the - Grandview Area To get the -Bus Garage -site redeveloped and back
on the tax rolls is a major reason that he supports the proposal. Finally, he observed that in his
opinion; the WMEP school is merely a token at establishing diversity. If diversity is truly desired
Commissioner Kelly suggested a greater focus be placed on open enrollment. He added that he has
seen an initiative from Representative Myron Orfield and others to change the way the school
districts function. He believes a good point was brought up that local jurisdictions need to show that
they support state presented initiatives in order to identify as a team player, even if they do not agree
with totally with all points of the program. Commissioner Kelly concluded that he believed there were
enough countervailing measure for him to support the HRA taking the next step in adopting the Letter
of Intent. He acknowledged Commissioner Faust's concerns and in his opinion; financing will
probably not come together for the deal. However, he supports the attempt to move forward.
Commissioner Maetzold said that over the past two years as the Kunz/Lewis site has been reviewed;
he had advocated using the site for a public purpose and for private development. He believes there
are a number of public uses that need to be addressed in Edina, that this is an ideal site to address
several of those needs, and the redevelopment proposal is answering several of those needs.
Page 13
r.
Minutes /Edina HRA/April 5, 1999
Commissioner Maetzold said he supports WMEP because it is a partnership with other communities,
enabling collaboration in addressing an educational need. He believes it is a good educational
concept worth pursuing and testing. Commissioner Maetzold stated WMEP would provide benefit to
the Edina School District by providing a few extra classrooms, because. some Edina students can
attend the magnet school; giving Edina students an additional program option; enabling Edina to
clean up the Bus Garage site, which has been a problem for many years; and providing for a senior
center, library and performing arts theater. Commissioner Maetzold favored the Letter of Intent,
noting it was not binding, but would get participants moving in the same direction to see if the project
was possible.
Commissioner Faust stated she wanted to comment on the process. She came onto the City Council
thinking that the members shared their views with the public and asked the public for input to make
decisions. She stated that the City asked the School Board to have an open meeting over a year
ago, then .she called for an open meeting in September and again in December of 1998. Every
question has been answered with responses that say ask someone else. Commissioner Faust
asked who WMEP was. In her experience, WMEP is a phone number with a phone recorder, and
they do not answer questions. The Edina School Board states WMEP is not their purview, and she is
disturbed that the process has not been open and the maximum amount of people have not been
able to comment on the proposal before this points. She stated that she was very surprised at Dr.
Dragseth's comment reported in the Edina Sun Current that he did not think the Edina Chamber of
Commerce could comment at this late date. The fact is that no one had any opportunity to comment
except for the small neighborhood until last week. Commissioner Faust said she is disturbed by the
fact that the process has not been open by the School District. She said attempts have been made to
request the process be more open, and she felt suspicious because it was so closed.
Chair Smith said he believed that the concerns heard are shared by all. He does not know of anyone
who does not share concern over the issues and benefits of the WMEP proposal. The development
has many benefits to Edina. As the HRA has talked about what Edina wants and needs, he began to,
think that a great deal of benefit to the City will be realized if a regional school could be built. Chair
Smith favored the Letter of Intent because it moves this proposal to the next step. He noted that the
property has been under debate for at least ten years. The City has owned the property for two years
and Chair Smith believes the Letter of Intent will draw the question to an end. If the proposal does
not work, then the City must look around for another development, but if the WMEP proposal does
work, the benefits to the City far outweigh any detriments of locating a regional school on the site.
Chair Smith called the question on the Letter of Intent as amended.
Ayes: Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Nay: Faust
Motion carried.
CLAIMS PAID Commissioner Maetzold made a motion to approve payment of the HRA Claims
as shown in detail on the Check Register dated March 31, 1999, and consisting of one page
totaling $81,392.56. Commissioner Faust seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, Chair Smith declared the meeting adjourned at
10:20 p.m.
Executive Director
Page 14
a
COUNCIL
CHEF., REGISTER
28 -APR -1999 (18:58) page 1
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT PO NUM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13427
05/03/99
$2,509.34
BRW INC.
PROF FEES ARCH AND EN
26706676
CENTENNIAL LAK
PRO FEE ARCH /E
05/03/99
$4,168.92
BRW INC.
PROF FEES ARCH AND EN
26706677
CENTENNIAL LAK
PRO FEE ARCH /E
< *>
$6,678.26*
13428
05/03/99
$489.85
TARGET
PARKS
51548
CENTENNIAL LAK
PARKS
05/03/99
$702.84
TARGET
PARKS"
42504
CENTENNIAL LAK
PARKS
05/03/99
$85.19
TARGET
PARKS
85830
CENTENNIAL LAK
PARKS
< *>
$1,277.88*
$7,956.14*
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
APRIL 19,1999 - 7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Faust, Hovland, Kelly, and Mayor Pro -tem
Maetzold.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and
seconded by Member Faust approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL _5, 1999, APPROVED Motion made
by Member Maetzold and seconded by Member Kelly approving the Minutes of the April
5,1999, Regular Council Meeting.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY AMY KLOBUCHAR INTRODUCED Mayor Pro -tem
Maetzold introduced Amy Klobuchar, Hennepin County Attorney. She explained one goal
she has had since her election is that the County Attorney's office should work better with
people in the communities. Ms. Klobuchar said she has worked with Police Chiefs around the
County to improve relations. In order to fight crime, everyone needs to work together.
Following her election she set forth a 100 day plan. Some highlights of that plan are: 1) repeat
gun- offenders are being targeted; 2) drug - dealers and gang- members - set up separate
property team focusing on property crimes; 3) more serious consequences for repeat juvenile
offenders; 4) attempting to streamline justice system; 5) improve coordination with Police
Departments; 6) augment child- support collection litigation; 7) represent County on civil
side; and 8) debt collection policies.
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL GRANTED,
INTERLACHEN CORPORATE CENTER, HAUGLAND COMPANY Affidavits of Notice
were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Planner Presentation
Planner Larsen informed the Council the subject property is generally located in the
southwest corner of Lincoln Drive and 7h Street. The property measures approximately five
acres, is vacant and zoned Planned Office District, POD -1. The current zoning has been in
place since 1984. Before 1984 part of the site was zoned for office use with the balance zoned
for high - density residential use.
Haugland Company is requesting Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat allowing the
construction of a four -story office building with a gross floor area of 103,933 square feet. A
stormwater retention pond would be located immediately north of the building. Site access
Page 1
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
9
would be provided by two curb cuts along Lincoln Drive. He noted the site has no access
from 71h Street because of the Highway 169 interchange's proximity. The exterior of the
building would be brick and glass. Planner Larsen said the landscaping plan as proposed
would conform to the numbers and sizes of plantings. required for a site of this size.
Planner Larsen stated -that - the proposed plans comply with all .Zoning Ordinance
requirements except parking. The building would be supported by parking for 459 vehicles.
One hundred eleven of those spaces would be on a one -level deck in the northeasterly
portion of the. site. Thirteen spaces have been converted into green space providing a greater
buffer to the residential neighborhood along Lincoln Drive. The proponent would provide a
"Proof of Parking" agreement showing these spaces could be restored if needed in the future.
However, a parking variance would be necessary for the project.
Planner Larsen reported that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final
Development Plan and the Preliminary Plat conditioned upon: 1) Final Plat Approval; 2)
Subdivision Dedication; 3) Developer's Agreement (including curb and gutter along Lincoln
Drive); 4) Landscaping Bond; and 5) Watershed District Permits. He added that staff
recommends a Proof of Parking Agreement be added as a condition if approval is granted.
Planner Larsen informed Council a revised Landscaping Plan was submitted, representing a
change to the parking lot in the southeasterly boulevard area south of the driveway and
south of the parking deck. This was the change that necessitated the Proof of Parking
Agreement. The original plan showed a 30 foot width from curb to start of parking, and
which has now been increased to 50 feet. Instead of three coniferous spruce trees in the area,
the number has been increased- to six. Two deciduous lindens on the north portion and the
red maples on the southerly portion of the site still remain on the plan. He explained that the
revised plan increases the green area I and visual buffer between the parking and the
residential areas.
Council comments
Mayor Pro -tem Maetzold summarized that the site has been Zoned POD -1 since 1984, and
the. proposed development meets Code requirements with no variances. Planner Larsen said
originally the plan met requirements but converting 15 parking spaces into green space,
created a need for a 13 -space parking variance. The original plan which meets requirements
would be of record; if a need is presented in the future, spaces could be installed, but during
the interim, a 13 -space variance would be required.
Member Hovland inquired about the landscape plan and what the distance would be to the
first row of parking. Planner Larsen answered 50 feet. Member Hovland asked for further
information about berming. Planner Larsen explained at present it is not clearly defined, but
berming could occur with the additional 20 feet of space. However, in staff's opinion, not
enough area exists to install a berm, but rather a sloping of the earth back before landscaping.
Member Hovland asked about the impact increased traffic will have on Lincoln, Malibu, and
through Parkwood Knolls. Planner Larsen answered the only place to access the site is from
Lincoln Drive which unfortunately residents' use to access their property as well. Too little
distance exists between the Highway 169 interchange off / on ramps and the short length on
Page 2
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
the north for access. Traffic will be generated, but little will arrive from the cul -de -sac on
Lincoln Drive. Probably some traffic will be some generated from residents cutting through
on Malibu Drive; however, most traffic will be oriented directly to and from the freeway.
Member Hovland asked if data exists from the developer about projected traffic volumes.
Planner Larsen answered there is no base of data.
Member Faust noted in the Planning Commission Minutes a comment was made about
moving the pond. She agreed' that the pond should be closer to the neighborhood or the
southeast corner. Member Faust questioned with site re- grading, if runoff could be directed
elsewhere. Planner Larsen said the runoff must be directed to the existing stormwater
system.
Developer comments:
Gene Haugland, President, Haugland Company, 5229 West Highwood Drive, commented
the Proof of Parking Agreement is a .good idea and they will work with staff accordingly. Mr.
Haugland added they attempted to move the pond to different locations within the site. The
outlet is adjacent to 7th Street and the site slopes in that direction. Another problem situating
parking was no access coming off 7th Street. Following discussions with engineers, architects
and City staff, the conclusion was to place the pond as proposed.
Craig Larson, Opus Northwest, said the low point on the site flows to the north and changing
that would be quite difficult.
Mr. Haugland added that one alternative to.moving the pond would be to move the building
closer to Lincoln. However, this did not seem like a viable option to the neighborhood.
Public comment
Arnie Abens, 4950 Malibu Drive, said he would rather not have a 100,000 square foot office
building in the neighborhood, but realized there is little they can do about it. Neighbors
believe the mistake was made in 1984. However, he added a single -story office building
would be more in keeping with the buildings in the area. Neighbors are concerned with the
increase in traffic, and are disappointed with the building's size. Mayor Pro -tem Maetzold
said the property has been zoned for some time and the developer is exercising the right to
develop it. He said the Council is sensitive to the needs of residents and neighborhoods and
tries to do the best job to adequately landscape to ameliorate these concerns.
Joann Pote, 4977 Lincoln Drive, concurred with Mr. Abens. She recently bought her home
and the proposal, as presented, is discouraging because of the size of the building. She asked
why the pond could not be relocated if the developer is moving a hill. She voiced concern
with parking on the street and suggested posting 'No Parking' signs on the residential side.
Council discussion:
Member Kelly noted once the Comprehensive Plan is approved and the Zoning requirements
are in place not much else can be done. He pointed out that Mr. Haugland and the Opus
Corporation are well respected and their projects highly regarded.
Page 3
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
Member Faust concurred with Member Kelly, but voiced concern with parking and traffic.
She informed the residents that if traffic is travelling too fast they should phone the Police
Department to ask for additional enforcement, or to place the speed trailer in the area. If
parking becomes a. problem, that issue can be examined more -fully as well, by City staff.
Member Hovland noted that transition properties are difficult. He added that staff and the
Council make their very best attempt to work with neighbors on landscaping and lighting.
Member Hovland also acknowledged Mr. Haugland's rights as property, owner to develop
the site under the Zoning Ordinance.
Mayor Pro -tem Maetzold added that after the discussion of the pond location, the pond
appears to be located where it has to be because of elevation and parking concerns.
Member Kelly introduced the. following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
APPROVING FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the Final Development Plan dated April
16, 1999, for Interlachen Corporate Center, Haugland Company on the southwest corner of
Lincoln Drive and 7th Street presented at the regular'meeting of the City Council on April
19, 1999, be and is hereby approved conditioned upon: 1) final plat approval, 2)
subdivision dedication, 3) developers agreement, 4) landscaping bond, 5) watershed
district permits and 6) proof of parking agreement. Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Kelly, Hovland, Maetzold
Resolution approved.
Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL
HAUGLAND FIRST ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota that that certain
plat entitled, HAUGLAND FIRST ADDITION platted by HAUGLAND COMPANY and
presented at the regular meeting of the City Council on April 19, 1999, is hereby granted
Preliminary Plat Approval with the following conditions: 1) final plat approval, 2)
subdivision dedication, 3) developers agreement, 4) landscaping bond, 5) watershed
district permits and 6) proof of parking agreement.. Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Kelly, Hovland, Maetzold
Resolution approved.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT GRANTED NORMANDALE LUTHERAN CHURCH
EXPANSION, 6100 NORMANDALE_ROAD Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved
and ordered placed on file.
Planner Presentation
Page 4
Minutes/Edina Ci!y Council/April 19,1999
Planner Larsen noted that Normandale Lutheran Church is requesting a Conditional Use
Permit to allow an expansion of their facility. The proposal includes interior remodeling and
improvements done as a part of the project that would not be subject to this permit.
Normandale Lutheran Church is generally located west of Highway 100 and south of'Valley
View Road. The Church wants to construct a 1,080 square foot addition on the.south side of
their sanctuary referred.to as a transept. The addition would contain 110 seats and expand
total seating capacity of the sanctuary to 609 seats. The proposed plan would increase on -site.
:parking on the east side from 183 to 205 spaces as well. as re- striping and reworking of the
existing parking lot. At 609 seats in the sanctuary; the church would have a parking demand
under Edina's ordinance of 203 spaces. This demand would be met by the proposed 205
spaces. Normandale Church has also agreed to limit parking demand on site by: 1) adding 22
spaces to the parking lot; 2) contracting with the Community Center for Sunday parking and
operating a shuttle between the Church and Community Center lot, 3) encouraging family
members to. car -pool and use remote parking; 4) moving the Monday Men's Bible Study
Group when they complete their cycle in May (Normandale Lutheran Church would no
- longer host the group in the fall); and 5) agreeing to any parking restrictions for adjacent
streets (Wilryan, Cloverdale,and Tingdale) during peak demands. Planner Larsen explained
two neighborhood meetings have been held before the Planning Commission meeting. The
plan as presented requires two variances: 1) A 6 -foot setback variance; and 2) A 3 -tree
variance for the landscaping plan (code requires 44 overstory trees on the site; the plan adds
13 for a total of 41). Staff believes requiring the three trees to meet ordinance requirements
would jeopardize growth -space for both the new and some existing trees. The proposal
concentrates on screening the site from the surrounding properties. Planner Larsen reported
that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit subject
to: 1) a Proof of Parking Agreement; and 2) Referral of parking restrictions to the Traffic
Safety Committee.
Member Hovland asked Planner Larsen to comment on the adequacy of the screening as
presented -in the landscaping plan. Planner Larsen replied there is not much room to build
berms, and that he approved of what was planned within the space available. Member
Hovland asked what percentage of the trees are coniferous. Planner Larsen informed Council
he does not have a percentage but believes most over story trees would be deciduous.
Proponent comment
Lyle Anderson, Church Administrator, Normandale Lutheran Church, commented the
Church wants to be a good neighbor and would be flexible with the type of trees used for
screening. Member Hovland inquired whether the neighbors had voiced an opinion about
what type of trees they would like used for the.screening. Mr. Anderson replied they have
received no feedback from the neighbors on landscaping.
No further public comments were received.
Council comment
Member Hovland commented the absence of neighbors at the public hearing..makes him
believe the Church has done a good job of communicating with them. He would like to see a
Page 5
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999 '
few conifers scattered within the landscaping to provide year -round screening. He suggested
working with. staff on the screening.
.Member Kelly said he is not in favor of granting variances when it involves planting fewer
trees. He suggested using the unexpended funds for larger trees or some other type of
landscaping. Planner Larsen explained increasing the class size of trees as well as using some
conifers rather than deciduous trees would balance out the costs. Member Kelly said he
would like to see the cost of three trees.'
Member Maetzold inquired how the motion. would incorporate the request for a change in
the landscaping plan.
Manager Hughes said he believes staff understands the concept and will work out the
particulars.
Member Kelly said he believes a six foot variance on Highway 100 is not an issue.
Member Hovland introduced the following resolution and moved its approval:
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the six foot building setback variance,
three tree landscape variance and Conditional Use Permit for Normandale Lutheran
Church, 6100 Normandale Road, be and are hereby granted. Motion seconded by Member
Faust.
Rollcall:
Ayes:- Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Resolution approved.
VARIANCE DENIAL UPHELD, N.C. LITTLE MEMORIAL HOSPICE, INC., 7019
LYNMAR LANE Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Mayor Pro -tem Maetzold believed he may have a conflict of interest with the proposed N.C.
Little Memorial Hospice variance appeal. Upon conversing with Attorney Gilligan, it was
determined no conflict exists.
Planner Presentation
Planner Larsen explained the subject property is located on the east side of Lynmar Lane, is
Zoned' R -2, and developed with a double bungalow building: The property is the location of
the N:C. Little Memorial Hospice which is a State licensed medically directed care facility
helping terminally ill patients and their families in a home -like setting. The property has been
operating as a hospice since December 1996.
At the April 1, 1999, Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, a variance was requested by the
Hospice to increase the size of existing bedroom spaces and to provide space for four
additional bathrooms. The purpose of the four foot addition to the back of the home was to
enlarge bedrooms making them more appropriate for residents using hospital beds who also
often times require wheel chairs. The bathroom remodeling occurring within the existing
Page 6
Minutes/Edina City Council/Apri119,1999
building will also upgrade some to make them handicap accessible. The addition is to be
encompassed within an area currently occupied by a patio.
The maximum allowable combined lot coverage for a double dwelling lot is 25 %. The
existing site conditions currently exceed the maximum allowable coverage requirements. The
addition would add approximately 488 square feet of building coverage. The improvements
are to accommodate the established case load of eight clients and would not provide
improvements allowing for added patient levels. The eight bed licensed residential hospice is
a permitted use within the R -2 Zoning District. The hospice is not a conditional use, so no
special conditions beyond those imposed upon it by the Zoning Ordinance are applicable.
Any modification of the property not conforming to the Zoning Ordinance must be
addressed through the variance process. Staff would support the request as submitted. Staff
-recommended approval of the variance as it was not increasing the intensity or capacity of
the facility but only being done to increase the utility and comfort of the residents because of
mobility concerns.
The Zoning Board of Appeals heard and denied the' lot coverage request by a vote of two
ayes and one nay.
Council Comment
Member Faust asked since the hospice is over the lot- coverage standard, was a variance
granted previously. Planner Larsen said staff cannot find any history a variance but the same
situation has happened in one other location in the past. He conjectured that perhaps
between the building permit and the final building, something was added.
Member Hovland asked if the variance were approved could the capacity be increased by
N.C. Little. Planner Larsen answered that the capacity would not change because the number
of bedrooms would not change.
Proponent Comment
Jackie McGowan, Co- founder and Co- director of the N.C. Little Hospice, added that the
hospice is limited by State licensing guidelines to eight beds. Ms. McGowan presented
pictures depicting the proposed 488 square foot expansion. She informed the Council the area
planned for the expansion is now a concrete patio. After the addition the property will still
have a patio. Ms. McGowan noted that in the past hospice residents normally stayed fourteen
days. Today residents stay as long as two years. The proposed expansion would allow
bathrooms to accommodate wheelchairs and comply with Americans With Disabilities
criteria. N.C. Little has looked at various options, but believes the requested addition is the
best option. Ms. McGowan said the new bathrooms would allow staff to better handle
patients and aid in the prevention of. infectious diseases. She added the hospice has never
had_ an incident, however, currently in order to dispose of patient waste from some rooms;
staff must either walk through the living room or kitchen. Ms. McGowan urged the Council
to grant the variance stating N.C. Little wants to make the hospice operate the best it can for
the hospice residents.
Page 7
Minutes/Edina Ci!y Council/April 19,1999
Member Hovland asked if the hospice would be completely handicapped accessible after the
addition. He also asked if there is progression where patients come to the facility ambulatory
and then become wheelchair bound or bedridden. Ms. McGowan answered that because of
the nature of hospice, this is almost always the case. In rare instances some patients are
ambulatory their entire stay, but typically, their condition deteriorates until they are
bedridden. Also in some cases,- patients come to the - hospice -by- stretcher and are unable to
walk their entire stay.
Public Comment
Mark Chamberlain, 7004 Bristol Boulevard, said that two .years ago when N.C. Little moved
into the home, he had discussed, the size and location with the City Attorney. The Attorney
sent him the statute that said a hospice could not go over 16 residents. He expressed concern
that an addition would bring an increase in the number of residents served and asked if it
could be documented that the hospice is limited to only eight patients. Mr. Chamberlain also
asked why the City requires a garage at this location. If N.C. Little would agree to tear down
the garage, Mr. Chamberlain stated he believes that more parking could be realized. Finally,
Mr. Chamberlain asked if the 488 additional square feet would be removed if and when the
hospice ceases and the property reverts to a single family use. Attorney Gilligan said it
would be possible to add a condition to the variance allowing no more than eight patients.
Mayor Pro -tem Maetzold asked if Edina's Code required a garage on the property and
whether or nor the addition would be considered permanent or could the City require that it
be removed if the use changed. Planner Larsen said the property is zoned R -2 and must have
a garage. He continued stating that a variance, if granted, becomes a property right and as
such the City could not require the addition to be removed if the use changes.
Tom Cavanaugh, 7104 Lynmar Lane, said his property faces Mavelle. Mr. Cavanaugh
expressed concern with parking at N.C. Little now, with construction on France Avenue. He
said two years ago when the hospice moved in, they told the neighbors that only two or three
cars would be parked on the street. Mr. Cavanaugh said he has counted as many as thirteen
cars. In the winter, it is almost impossible to plow the street because of hospice parking on
the north side. Traffic is very congested now because of the hospice.
Glen Dornfeld, 7101 Lynmar Lane, commented that no one opposes a hospice. However, he
believes that any addition to the building will bring - additional traffic. Mavelle is very narrow
today with eight cars parked on the north side plus one service truck on the south side. Mr.
Dornfeld urged the variance be denied so no additional crowding be allowed.
Mary Ekegren, 7016 Lynmar Lane, stated that she would not support tearing down the
garage because. in her opinion, it would not increase parking and would create problems
with storage of yard tools, etc. Ms. Ekegren said that the look and feel of the R -2 District is
already gone, but that the addition should be disallowed because of the congestion in the
area.
Council Discussion/ Action
Mayor Pro -tem Maetzold asked staff to confirm whether or not the proposed addition would
create additional activity at N.C. Little Hospice. Planner Larsen answered that in staff's
Page 8
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
opinion there should be no change in traffic because the addition would not increase the
number of beds or staffing.
Member Kelly stated that if the Council decided to support the variance, which he did not
support, they should limit the number of beds allowed in the hospice. He continued adding
he did not support the variance because in his opinion, lot coverage and overbuilding is one
of the biggest issues faced in the community -. The hospice is an admirable use, providing a
great service, but Member Kelly did not believe it warranted changing the zoning ordinance
allowing such a high percentage of lot coverage. If the hospice moves on to another facility,
someone would still use the property and the lot would still be over on lot coverage. This is a
land use issue and for this reason, Member Kelly does not support granting the variance.
Member Faust commented that regardless if the hospice is increased in size or not, the real
problem in the situation is parking. Member Faust asked the proponents if the garage was
currently used to park cars. Bob Solheim, co- director of N.C. Little, replied that the hospice
parks vehicle, and also park cars on the driveway. He said they park about five cars on both
the driveway and in the garage. Ms. McGowan added the vehicles must be moved around to
allow ambulances access to the back of the hospice. Continuing, Member Faust questioned
whether parking would improve if the garage were removed. Ms. McGowan replied that
removing the garage has been investigated and no more parking would be realized. She
continued that the hospice is a non - profit organization with a board of directors and will be
in existence for a long time. Ms. McGowan disagreed that a parking problem exists, and
asked that no decision be based upon the parking situation as it exists with the construction
going on at Room and Board. She pointed out that N.C. Little has an agreement with the
mortuary when they have their staff meetings on Tuesday. The hospice is just trying to meet
State requirements. Member Faust acknowledged that there are two issues. She asked if
parking was only allowed on one side of the street. Ms. McGowan responded that Mavelle
only allows parking on the north side. Mr. Solheim expressed frustration that governments
that encourage hospices also require they operate in a single family neighborhood. He stated
that the hospice has cared for 252 terminally ill patients, of which, 110 were residents from
Edina. The other came from Bloomington, Hopkins, Minnetonka and surrounding areas. Mr.
Solheim said the hospice is caring for neighbors and urged approval of the variance.
Member Faust asked staff if there were anyway that some of the traffic congestion could be
mitigated. Engineer Hoffman replied that traffic from the construction is causing a temporary
problem. However, when there is no construction, parking along the streets exists to park
between 12 -14 cars. The street provides a no parking condition, a parking lane, and a driving,
lane. There is room under normal conditions. He stated the police zone officers check the area
regularly and do not report problems. Currently, officers see pick -ups parked daily coming
from the construction site. Engineer Hoffman stated as Director of Public Works he has never
had a complaint that there is a problem plowing snow in the area.
Member Faust stated she served on the Planning Commission for ten years before serving on
the City Council and she had never seen a variance request for a 33% lot coverage. She noted
that the Board of Appeals had difficulty when variances were requested for a 29% lot
Page 9
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
coverage. The hospice will still be able to serve residents. Member Faust said she cannot
support granting such a large variance setting precedent in the residential areas.
Member Hovland asked about the landscaping proposed behind the building. Ms. McGowan
said the entire back yard would be fenced in. Member Hovland continued stating, that when
granting a variance you must look at whether there has been an undue hardship required
causing someone to need to exceed regulations. In this case the addition causes excess lot
coverage. Member Hovland believed that in this situation an undue hardship exists because
the hospice must meet legally imposed obligations as well as limitations on the capabilities of
the residents, who over time become debilitated. In Member Hovland's, opinion, this
situation meets the undue hardship standard. Based upon these reasons he would support
the variance with two conditions: 1) no more than eight patients be allowed for occupancy;.
and 2) landscaping issues previously noted. He continued stating that the City should
continue to monitor the parking issue. Member Hovland stated he believed it is important
that people be treated and handled with the dignity they deserve as they go through the last
stages of their life.
Mayor Pro -tern Maetzold also supported the variance. He stated he agreed with Member
Hovland. N.C. Little came to the City with the large lot coverage issue when. they began
operation as a hospice. In his opinion, a hardship exists and granting the variance is
reasonable. The organization must be in a residential neighborhood, yet still needs to comply
with state requirements. They are providing an excellent needed humanitarian service in the
community. He acknowledged the split positions of the Council.
Member Hovland made a motion to overturn Zoning Board of Appeals denial of N.C.
Little's variance request with two conditions: 1) no more than eight patients be allowed
for occupancy; and 2) the back yard be completely fenced in and landscaped. Mayor Pro-
tein Maetzold seconded the motion.
Member Faust commented that this was a very difficult vote, but she felt very strongly that
the City cannot set precedent by setting the large variance from the lot coverage standard.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Hovland, Maetzold
Nays: Faust, Kelly
Motion failed.
ON SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSES ISSUED TO PANTRY RESTAURANT,
INC. d.b.a. EDEN AVENUE GRILL AND RT MINNEAPOLIS FRANCHISE LLC, d.b.a.
RUBY TUESDAY Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Manager Hughes noted that the two applicants have now submitted plans to the Health
Department that are satisfactory showing how they plan to serve and store liquor. He noted
that staff recommended approval of the licenses contingent upon completion of the
applicants' remodeling and Edina Health Department final inspection.
Mayor Pro -tern Maetzold called for public comment. No one appeared to speak.
Page 10
i
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
Motion by Member Faust and seconded by Member Hovland granting On -Sale
Intoxicating and Sunday Sale Liquor Licenses to Pantry Restaurant, Inc. d.b.a. Eden
Avenue Grill conditioned upon completion of remodeling and final inspection by the
Health Department.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Kelly, Hovland, Maetzold
Licenses granted.
Motion by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust granting On -Sale Intoxicating
and Sunday Sale Liquor Licenses to RT Minneapolis Franchise LLC d.b.a. Ruby Tuesday
conditioned upon completion of remodeling and final inspection by the Health
Department.
Rollcall•
Ayes: Faust, Kelly, Hovland, Maetzold
Licenses granted.
ORDINANCES NO. 1999 -8 ADOPTING CURRENT MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING
CODE AND NO. 1999 -9 ADOPTING CURRENT FIRE CODES ADOPTED Manager
Hughes explained the two proposed ordinances would adopt the most current statutory
building and fire codes. He said they did not substantively change the existing code, but
brought it into compliance with Minnesota Statutes.
Member Hovland made a motion introducing the following ordinance, granting first
reading, and waiving second reading:
ORDINANCE NO. 1999-8
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 410 AND 440
OF THE CITY CODE TO PROVIDE UPDATES TO THE
MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE AND THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE,
TO ADOPT OPTIONAL PROVISIONS OF
THE MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE AND THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE,
AND TO UPDATE PLUMBING INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Subsection 410.01 of Section 410 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
"410.01 State Building Code Adopted. There is hereby adopted and incorporated
herein by reference, as a section of this Code, the Minnesota State Building Code
(the "MSBC ") as promulgated by the State Department of Administration pursuant
to M.S. 16B.59 through 16B.75, including amendments to the MSBC in effect on
October 5, 1998, and including the following, but only the following, listed optional
provisions of the MSBC and of the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Building Code as
promulgated by the International Conference of Building Officials (the "UBC "),
except, however, that fees shall be as provided in thin Section. The optional
provisions which are hereby adopted are as follows:
Page 11
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
A. . Chapter 1306 with Option 8 (Group M, S, or F occupancies with 2,000 or more
gross square feet) of the MSBC relating to Special Fire Protection Systems.
E. Chapter 1335, parts 1335.0600 to 1335.1200 of the MSBC relating to
Floodproofing."
Section 2. Paragraph A of Subsection 410.03 of Section 410 of the City Code is
amended to read as follows:
"A. The State Building Code regulations known and identified as- Chapters 1300,
1301, 1302, 1305, 1306, 1307, 1315, 1325f 1330f 1335,1340,1346, 1350, 1360, 1361, 1370,
4715, and 7670."
Section 3. Paragraph C of Subsection 410.03 of Section 410 of the City Code is
amended to read as follows:
"C. The 1996 Edition of the National Electrical Code (NEC) as approved by the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI/NFPA70- 1996)."
Section 4. Paragraph F of Subsection 410.03 of Section 410 of the City Code is
amended to read as follows:
"F. Minnesota Energy Code as set out in Chapter 7670 of Minnesota Rules, 1998."
Section 5. Paragraph G of Subsection 410.03 of Section 410 of the City Code is
amended to read as follows:
"G. ' Minnesota Plumbing Code as set out in Chapter 4715 of Minnesota Rules,
1998."
Section 6. Subd. 2 of Subsection 440.03 of Section 440 of the City Code is amended
to read as follows:
Subd.2 Exceptions. 1. Any other provisions of this Section to the contrary
notwithstanding and where permitted by State Law, permits may be issued to make
repairs, additions, replacements, and alterations to any plumbing or drainage work
or install water conditioning equipment in any single family dwelling structure
used exclusively for living purposes or any buildings accessory thereto, provided
that all such work in connection with it shall be performed only by the person who
is the bona fide owner and occupant of such dwelling as the person's residence or a
member of such owner - occupant's immediate family. "Immediate family" includes
only a parent, spouse, child by birth or adoption, and such child's spouse.
2. Water service . and building sewer lines may be installed by persons who
complete the training for and earn a Pipe Layer Card, their assistants and contractors
who employ them so long as there is at least one cardholder in each trench where
work is proceeding.
Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon
passage and publication.
First Reading: April 19,1999
Second Reading. Waived
Page 12
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
Published in the Edina Sun Current: April 28,1999
City Clerk Mayor Pro -tem
Member Faust seconded the motion
- Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Ordinance adopted.
Member Kelly made a motion introducing the following ordinance, granting first reading
and waiving second reading:
Ordinance No. 1999 -9
An Ordinance Amending Section 605
of the City Code to Provide Updates to the
Minnesota Uniform Fire Code
The City Council of the City Of Edina Ordains:
Section 1 Subdivision 1. of 605.01 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Subd.1 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. The 1998 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code (the
"MUFC" ), promulgated by the State Department of Public Safety as published June
29, 1998 in Minnesota Rules, Specifically Minnesota Statutes 1998- (299F.011 Parts
7510.3310 through 3360, 3410 through 3440, 3460 through 3480, 3540, 3580, 3590, 3640,
3660 and 3700 with the changes and omissions as set forth in this Section.
Section 2 Subdivision 2 of 605.01 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:.
Subd. 2 Uniform Fire Code. The 1997 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code promulgated
by the International Conference of Building Officials and the Western Chiefs
Association (the "UFC "), with the changes and omissions as set forth in this section
and the "MUFC "...
Section 3 Subdivision 605.01 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended by adding a new
Subdivision 3 as follows:
Subd. 3 Appendices. The following appendices of the UFC are adopted as part of
this Code: I -A, II -D, II -E, II -K, II =L, IV -B, and VI -A.
Section 4 Subdivision 1 of 605.02 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Subd. 1 Article 1. Article 1 section 105 "Permits" of the UFC is included in. its
entirety:
Section 5 Subdivision 2 of 605.02 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Page 13
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
Subd. 2 Article 10. Article 10 "Fire Protection" of the UFC as adopted by the MUFC
is amended as follows:
Section 1001 General. is amended by adding a new subsection 1001.3 reading
as follows: "1001.3 Permits. Permits for the installation of fire protection
systems shall be obtained as provided for in Section 625 of this Code."
The remaining sections are to be re- numbered 1001.4 through 1001.11
respectively.
Section 6 Subdivision 3 of 605.02 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Subd. 3 Article 11. Article 11 "General Precautions against Fire" of the UFC as
adopted by the MUFC is amended as follows:
A. Section 1102.3 Open Burning is amended by adding to it new sections as follows:
Section 1102.3.1 Open Fires Prohibited. No person shall ignite, cause to be ignited,
or maintain an open fire except as permitted in section. 1102.3.
Section 1102.3.2 Certain Open Fires Permitted. An open burning permit in
accordance with Section 1101.3 may be issued for the following purposes:
1. Instruction and training of firefighting personnel.
2. Abatement of hazards that, in the opinion of the fire chief, cannot be
abated by other reasonable means.
3. Management of vegetation by the jurisdiction, other governmental
agencies, or other individuals that, in the opinion of the Fire Chief, show a
valid need, and under the direction of the Fire Department.
4. Special events or ceremonies by recognized organizations, not conforming
to Appendix II -K and under the direct supervision of the Fire Department.
B. The remainder of the sections shall be re- numbered 1102.3.3 through 1102.3.9
respectively.
Section 7 Subdivision 605.03 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
605.3 Codes on File. One copy of each of the following, each marked "Official Copy ", is
on file in the office of the Fire Marshal and shall remain on file and available for use and
examination by the public upon request:
A. MUFC
B. UFC
Page 14
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
Section 8 Subdivision 2 of 605.07 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Subd. 2 Existing Fire Lanes and Signs. Fire lanes in existence prior to the effective
date of this Section shall be permitted to remain using existing signs so long as such
signs are maintained in good repair and condition. If the Bureau of Fire Prevention
determines that such signs are not maintained as required in this Section, it may
require signing as provided in Subd. 3 of this Subsection.
Section 9 Subdivision 3 of 605.07 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Subd. 3 New Fire Lanes and Sign Specifications. Fire lanes established after the
effective date of this Code, or existing fire lanes changed after the effective date of
this Code, shall be marked by signs, not more than 100 feet apart, bearing the
words, " No Parking, Fire Lane, By Order of the Fire Chief ", with the first and last
sign marking the limits of the fire lane. The signs shall have red letters and a red
border on a white background, shall be 12 inches by 18 inches in size and shall
otherwise comply with the standards from time to time established by the Fire
Chief for such signs.
Section 10 Subdivision 4 of 605.07 of Section 605 of the City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Subd. 4 Maintenance of Fire Lanes and Signs. When the fire lane is on public
property or public right -of -way, the sign or signs shall be erected and maintained
by the City, and when on private property, they shall be erected by the owner at the
owners expense within 30 days after the owner has been notified of the order. After
these signs are erected they shall be maintained by the owner at the owners
expense. After the signs are erected, no person shall park a vehicle in or otherwise
occupy or obstruct the fire lane.
Section 11 Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon passage
and publication.
First Reading: April 19,1999
Second Reading: Waived
Published in the Edina Sun Current: April 28,1999
City Clerk Mayor Pro -tem
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Ordinance adopted.
*BID AWARDED FOR TOPDRESSING MIXTURE FOR 4 -WHEEL DRIVE HYDRAULIC
ROTARY MOWER, BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE Motion made by Member Hovland and
Page 15
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
seconded by Member Faust for award of bid for 4 -wheel drive hydraulic rotary mower for
Braemar Golf Course to recommended low bidder, North Star Turf, Inc., at $29,146.00 plus
tax.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*BID AWARDED _ _ FOR _ORTHO -POLY BLEND WATER TREATMENT PRODUCT,
UTILITY DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member
Faust for award of bid for the annual purchase of ortho -poly blend water treatment
product to DPC Industries, Inc., at $6.40 /gallon.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
BID AWARDED FOR MAPLE ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S -75 Following a
brief discussion Member Kelly made a motion for award of bid for the Maple Road
Sidewalk Improvement No. S -75 to the recommended low bidder Ron Kassa Construction,
Inc., at $50,822.00. Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Nay: Faust
Motion carried.
*BID AWARD CONTINUED TO 513/99 FOR CHEYENNE CIRCLE LIFT STATION
IMPROVEMENT LS -14 Motion made by member Hovland and seconded by member
Faust to continue the award of bid for the Cheyenne Circle Lift Station Improvement LS -14
to May 3,1999.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -four ayes.
*TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT OF APRIL 6, 1999 APPROVED Motion made by Member
Hovland and seconded by Member Faust approving Section A of the Traffic Safety Staff
Report of April 6,1999:
1. Installation of a "No Outlet" sign for northbound Larada Lane at Green Farms
Road;
2. Installation of a "Yield" sign for eastbound Green Farms Road at Larada Lane;
3. Paint a STOP bar on the roadway indicating the stopping point for a red light for
vehicles on the southbound approach to the intersection at Metro Boulevard and
West 70th Street; and
4. Deploy the speed display trailer for education purposes in both directions in the
4300 block of Parklawn Avenue
and to acknowledge Sections B and C.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
ROY K JENSON ENDORSED TO HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD AS CANDIDATE FOR
NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD OF MANAGERS Manager
Hughes stated that Roy K. Jenson, an Edina resident, has applied for the vacancy on the Nine
Mile Creek Watershed District Board of Managers. Member Hovland said that Mr. Jenson
had spoken with him also requesting the Council endorse his appointment. Following a brief
discussion, Member Hovland introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
Page 16
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
WHEREAS, a vacancy exists on the Nine -Mile Creek Watershed District Board of
Managers.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that it
hereby recommends and nominates Roy K. Jenson to the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners for appointment to the Nine -Mile Creek Watershed District Board of
Managers and urges the Commissioners to approve the appointment.
Passed this 191h day of April, 1999. Member Faust seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
TURF MANAGEMENT PLAN DISCUSSED Park Director Keprios gave background
information regarding the City's Turf Management Plan. The Council adopted a temporary
moratorium on the use of herbicides from August 1, 1994 to March 31, 1995. Input was
received from community organizations as well as concerned residents and non - residents,
staff, and professional resources. Staff created a Turf Management Plan based on an
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to turf management. Integrated Pest
Management is an ecological approach to management of turf resulting in a reduction in use
of potentially hazardous chemicals. The plan was approved by the Council in 1995. Since
adoption of the plan, the City has significantly reduced its use of herbicides on public
property.
Director Keprios explained the goal of the Turf Management Plan is to continue to manage
the City's public property turf areas with the least amount of herbicides. The policy was
based on the premise that the potential short -term and long -term health benefits far
outweigh the additional costs and aesthetic results associated with the Turf Management
Plan. Some roadside areas have not been treated with herbicides for over four years and now
require treatment as well as aerification and over - seeding to restore the turf to a healthy
condition. The areas are primarily boulevards, frontage roads and median areas that are
classified "B" under the Plan and are rarely used by children and considered to be a lower
health risk area. Staff intends to treat those areas and to restore them to a healthy condition
this spring.
Weed control is not a perfect science and the Turf Management Plan will need to be adjusted
to fit changing technology, research and other factors that influence the IPM approach to turf
care. Staff will continue to monitor and maintain the safest and healthiest turf within the City
with a minimal use of herbicides.
Member Faust said weeds at the garden club flower gardens are higher than the flowers and
should be treated. Medians around Southdale also need treatment in her estimation. Director
Keprios stated the areas were in keeping with the turf management plan, but staff will check
the areas and take care of the weeds.
Member Hovland noted various areas that needed treatment; the 701h Street area, several
limestone walls around the City, and the area around the Galleria. He noted the existing
Council were not in office when the Turf Management Plan was adopted and commended
Page 17
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
those who worked on it. He questioned whether on page 12, Item 10, Area B should be Area
A. Director Keprios said he would keep this in mind when planning the treatment. Member
Hovland inquired whether additional flower beds could be included in public areas.
Connie Hondl, 5209 Tifton Drive, reminded the Council that this process took a long time
and entailed- -many- hours of work to decide the end- classifications.: She expressed concern
with the use of pesticides and believes the public should be tolerant of a few weeds and
dandelions.
Vince Cockriel, Park Superintendent, said the larger boulevards are showy and can create a
nuisance with dandelions. The problem occurs when treatment is done on smaller boulevard
areas where a margin for error exists with drifting and over - spray. Children do not play in
those areas but residents do see this drift or over -spray causing concern.
Mayor Pro -tem Maetzold stated staff has identified areas as needing treatment and there may
be other areas that need to be included in the treatment program and require staff
examination.
Manager Hughes noted now is the perfect season for treatment and if the Council has areas
within the City of concern, staff should be made aware of these areas.
Director Keprios reported that residents say, "this is what makes Edina great ", about both
treating weeds and not treating weeds. It is a difficult place to be in.
Member Faust commented there are tons of weeds in Edina but commercial tax payers
should have an attractive area around their property.
Member Kelly stated some parks have deteriorated significantly but he believes we should
stay on board with the program or consider tweaking it to make it even better. He personally
does not want Edina's parks to be the source of comments about how unkempt they are. He
would not mind revisiting certain areas in Edina to see if additional areas could be included
in the treatment program.
Director Keprios responded where rinks are flooded it is nearly impossible to grow grass.
Bob Kojetin, 5016 William Avenue, inquired about areas between the concrete and the
curb /sidewalks. He noted about ten years ago a program used soil sterilant to eradicate the
weeds. Director Keprios said the areas are part of the program and are sprayed.
Robert Castellano, , 4854 France, inquired what type of herbicides are being used to treat the
weeds. Director Keprios said the Turf Management Plan states the type of herbicides that are
acceptable.
No further action was required nor taken.
Page 18
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 19,1999
*DESIGNATION AND RESERVE FUND BALANCE REPORTED FOR YEAR ENDING
DECEMBER 31, 1998 Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Faust
accepting the report of reserved and designated fund balances for year ending December
31,1998.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
CLAIMS PAID Motion made by Member Hovland approving payment of the following
claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated April 16, 1999, and consisting of 31
pages: General Fund $248,846.97, Communications $768.45; Working Capital $67,455.82; Art
Center $4,247.87, Golf Dome Fund $5,987.17, Swimming Pool Fund $19,780.77; Golf Course
Fund $74,825.74; Ice Arena Fund $27,706.63; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes $20,666.07,
Utility Fund $141,086.78; Storm Sewer Utility Fund $16,882.95; Recycling Program
$35,092.44; Liquor Dispensary Fund $150,547.49; Construction Fund $29,236.62; Park Bond
Fund $2,152.56; TOTAL $845,284.33; and for confirmation of payment of the following
claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated April 6, 1999, and consisting of 3
pages: General Fund $231,663.10; Communications $7,672.75; Utility Fund $12,694.06;
Liquor Dispensary Fund $92,927.65; Construction Fund $92.10; TOTAL $345,049.66.
Member Faust seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Pro -Tem Maetzold adjourned
~ the Council Meeting at 9:26 P.M.
City Clerk
Page 19
MINUTES
OF THE MEETING OF THE
EDINA BOARD OF REVIEW HELD AT CITY HALL
APRIL 12,1999, AT 5:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Faust, Maetzold and Mayor Smith. Member
Hovland entered the meeting at 5:05 p.m. Member Kelly entered the meeting at 5:15 p.m.
The meeting was convened pursuant to published Notice of Board of Review in the Edina
Sun - Current and notice posted on City bulletin boards for the purpose of hearing those
persons who considered themselves aggrieved by their property valuation for assessment
purposes, or who were requesting homestead classification.
Mayor Smith stated no decision would -be made at- this meeting, but would- take place at .the- -
continuation meeting of the Board on April 19, 1999. He added that property owners would
be notified of the Board's decision within twenty days. Further appeal may be made to the
Hennepin County Board of Equalization beginning June 15,1999.
The following property owners appeared personally or were represented before the Board to
object to the Assessor's estimated market value as of January 2,1999:
Assessors
Owners'
Name /Address
PID Number
Est. Mkt. Value
Value
Timothy D. Asgrimson
05- 116 -21 -44 -0054
$255,800
$230,000
5414 Creek View Lane
Julie Harper - Wylie*
32- 117 -21 -11 -0023
$320,000
$269,000
5300 Glenbrae Circle
Christopher /Gailen Krug
29- 117 -21 -44 -0036
$341,600
$320,000
5232 Lockloy Drive
Jacqueline S. Mithum
18- 028 -24 -44 -0067
$205,100.
$195,000
5308 Halifax Avenue
Andy A. Poncius
31- 028 -24 -22 -0074
$181,600
$170,000
4909 Trillium Lane
Lowel /Patricia Johnson
33- 117 -21 -33 -0049
$168,000
$145,000
6004 Hansen Road
Gregory'Dovolis
06- 116 -21 -43 -0032
$699,600
$553,260
6805 Dakota Trail
James F. Gehrke
18- 028 -24 -13 -0022
$344,900
$278,000
4622 Casco Avenue
Michael L. Ricke
29- 117 -21 -33 -0004
$137,200
$100,000
5309 Blake Road
Andrea Weisberg/ Daniel Rutman
06- 116 -21 -41 -0048
$272,100
$233,000
6728 Rosemary lane
Clara Gooding
19- 028 -24-41 -0021
$164,400
$152,300
5824 Halifax Avenue
Namron Company LLC
20- 028 -24 -23 -0102
$176,100
$158,000
5632 Chowen Avenue South
James Ostlund
33- 117 -21 -24 -0027
$285,700
$265,000
5020 Normandale Court
John F. Healy
30- 028 -24 -33 -0090
$357,000
$276,250
4808 Upper Terrace
Minutes/Edina Board of Review /April 12,1999
A
-*Mayor Smith - removed himself from the meeting and Mayor Pro _Tem Maetzold handled
these two residents presentations and the discussion of these presentations.
...The Council- heard -the- owners - present-- their_ reasons -for-requesting reductions and in some
cases, asked questions clarifying issues.
The owners of the following properties submitted applications or letters objecting to their
market value and requested the Board's review, however, the owners did not appear
personally:
Assessors
Owners'
Name /Address
PID Number
Est. Mkt. Value
Value
05- 116 -21 -11 -0060
$134,200
James Voss
$127,500
6300 Valley View Road
Demetrios J. Villas
05- 116 -21 =44 -0053
$221,300
$212,600
5416 Creek Valley Road
Wayne Rice
31- 028 -24 -14 -0001
$2,969,000
$1,368,400
7200 France Avenue
Robert Benham
5618 Concord Avenue
19- 028 -24 -23 -0041
$221,600
$175,000-
$200,000
Lorraine Chalker
04- 116 -21 -22 -0021
$159,100
-6321-Mildred-Avenue
28- 117 -21- 234114
_
$75,000
G. Kelsey Smith*
18- 028 -24 -22 -0006
$197,100
$175,000
4801 W. 441h Street
18-028-24-111,70076
$413,900.
$353,000
Marie Hidem
07 -028 -24-44 -0050
$158,400
$145,500
4007 Sunn side Road
30- 117 -21 -34 -0026
$568,400
$530,000
John J/ Mary Jane Raich
05- 116 -21 -42 -0033
$244,600
$239,000
6613 Galway Drive
20- 028 -24 -32 -0065
$145,400
$127,000
Virginia Borgeson
29- 028 -24 -22 -0057
$166,500
6216 Ewing Avenue
Frank Cardarelle
33- 117 -21 -34 -0122
$412,400
6125 Wilryan Avenue
-*Mayor Smith - removed himself from the meeting and Mayor Pro _Tem Maetzold handled
these two residents presentations and the discussion of these presentations.
...The Council- heard -the- owners - present-- their_ reasons -for-requesting reductions and in some
cases, asked questions clarifying issues.
The owners of the following properties submitted applications or letters objecting to their
market value and requested the Board's review, however, the owners did not appear
personally:
Page 2
Assessors
Owners'
Name /Address
PID Number
Est. Mkt. Value
Value
Robert J. Malby
05- 116 -21 -14 -0043
$244,900
$220,000
6517 Limerick Drive
John E. Elkins
08- 116 -21 -33 -0151
$331,700
$290,000
7740 Marth Court
Robert R. Pfefferle
19- 028 -24 -11 -0039
$217,500
$204,000
5428 Halifax Avenue
Gladys Mitchell
31- 028 -24 -24 -0099
$185,300
$175,600
7212 West Shore Drive
Nancy J. Van -Zile
28- 117 -21- 234114
$94,900
$75,000
4525 Vandervork Avenue
Thomas Awsumb
18-028-24-111,70076
$413,900.
$353,000
4703 Towne Road
Karla K. Jones
30- 117 -21 -34 -0026
$568,400
$530,000
5226 Green Farms Road
Gregory G. Roth
20- 028 -24 -32 -0065
$145,400
$127,000
5801 Drew Avenue South
Page 2
s
Minutes/Edina Board of Review /April 12,1999
Member Hovland made a motion accepting the letters of the aforementioned property
owners, allowing them to move along to the Hennepin County Board of Equalization.
Member Maetzold seconded the motion.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried
The following persons came to the Board of Review, and objected to their. assessed value,
however, did not wait to speak personally.
Page 3
Assessors
Owners'
Name /Address
PID Number
Est. Mkt. Value
Value
Rodney J. Olson
08- 116 -21 -24 -0008
$269,100
5804 Kemrich Drive
Joseph H. Anderson
07- 028 -24 -43 -0059
$219,100
$208,000
4404 Branson Street
Raymond H. Ehlers
30- 028 -24 -43 -0023
$144,900
$136,900
4212 701h Street
Scott M. Busyn
18- 028 -24 -42 -0036
$307,600
$260,000
5019 Bruce Avenue
Peter V. Hall
32- 117 -21 -43 -0041
$257,100
$246,000
6109 Ridgeway Road
James- Huettl _
_ 067,116 -21 -44 70047
_ $227,800
__$215,600 _
6805 St. Patricks Lane
Randy T. McKay
31- 117 -21 -14 -0037
$531,900
$415,000
5615 Schaefer Road
Grandview Cemetery
30- 117 -21 -23 -0002
$509,400
6901 Maloney Avenue
$297,200
$123,400
John A. Palmer
04- 116 -21 -21 -0054
$202,900
$177,000
5101 West 62nd Street
John S.Newhouse
30- 117 -21-43 -0050
$540,000
$450,000
5216 Larada Lane
Robert Quirk
06- 116 -21 -14 -0063
$290,400
6505 Nordic Drive
John E. Bryan
33- 117 -21 -23 -0017
$214,400
5701 Code Avenue
Phyllis S. Locke
31- 117 -21 -24 -0081
$395,800
6601 Field Way
Dr. George W. Lund
06- 116 -21 -42 -0022
$418,800
6409 Indian Hills Road
Dorothy Kronlokken
19- 028 -24 -31 -0125
$104,200
5909 Ashcroft Avenue
Edina Hawthorn Suites
32- 028 -24 -34 -0025
$8,946,0000
$7,800,000
3400 Edinborou h Way
Heritage of Edina
29- 028 -24 -21 -00009
$3,458,000
3450 & 3456 Heritage Drive
29- 028 -24 -21 -00099
$2,371,400
3434 Rembrandt
29- 028 -24 -21 -00101
$3,352,000
3420 Roybet
29- 028 -24 -21 -00010
$2,584,500
29- 028 -24 -21 -00100
$50,1000
Member Hovland made a motion accepting the letters of the aforementioned property
owners, allowing them to move along to the Hennepin County Board of Equalization.
Member Maetzold seconded the motion.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried
The following persons came to the Board of Review, and objected to their. assessed value,
however, did not wait to speak personally.
Page 3
Minutes/Edina Board of Review /April 12,1999
No further appeals being presented, the 1999 Board of Review meeting was continued to
Monday, April 19,1999, at 5:00 p.m. for decision on the appeals presented
City Clerk
Page 4
Assessors.
Owners'
Name /Address
PID Number
Est. Mkt. Value
Value
Robert Winter
19- 028 -24 -14 -0075
$217,800
4200 Philbrook Lane
Mona Andrews
04- 116 -21 -34 -0056
$152,100
5132 Abercrombie Drive
No further appeals being presented, the 1999 Board of Review meeting was continued to
Monday, April 19,1999, at 5:00 p.m. for decision on the appeals presented
City Clerk
Page 4
MINUTES OF THE
OF THE EDINA BOARD OF REVIEW
APRIL 19,1999
5:00 P.M.
Answering rollcall for the continued meeting of the Board of Review were Members Faust, Hovland, and
Mayor Pro -tern Maetzold. Member Kelly entered the meeting at 5:50 p.m.
Mayor Pro -tem Maetzold explained the purpose of the continuation meeting was to allow the Board to
take action on the cases presented in person by residents and by the City Assessor on behalf of absent
resident regarding the 1999 assessed value of property. After action by the local Board of Review
- - residents may continue the process with - Hennepin County.----- - -- -- — - - - - - -
The Board reviewed each property submitted and discussed whether to sustain, decrease or increase the
assessors estimated market value. Mayor Pro -tern Maetzold noted that Dwight P. Hager's application
was received April 13, 1999, after the Board Meeting. Assessor Petersburg explained that he checked
with Hennepin County and was told the Board could sustain the value on the property -allowing the- -
owner to continue with Hennepin County if they so choose.
Motion by Member Faust, seconded by Member Hovland to approve the City Assessor's
recommendations, sustaining, increasing or decreasing the estimated market values of the following
properties per staff recommendations as noted:
Page 1
Assessors
Owners'
Board
Name /Address
PID Number
Est. Mkt. Value
Value
Action
Robert J. Malby
05- 116 -21 -14 -0043
$244,900
$220,000
Reduce to
6517 Limerick Drive
$230,000
Timothy D. Asgrimson
05- 116 -21 -44 -0054
$255,800
$230,000
Sustain
5414 Creek View Lane
John E. Elkins
08- 116 -21 -33 -0151
$331,700
$290,000
Sustain
7740 Marth Court
Robert R. Pfefferle
19- 028 -24 -11 -0039
$217,500
$204,000
Sustain
5428 Halifax Lane
Gladys Mitchell
31- 028 -24 -24 -0099
$185,300
$175,600
Sustain
7212 West Shore Drive
Nancy J. Van -Zile
28- 117 -21 -23 -0114
$94,900
$75,000
Sustain
-4525 Vandervork Avenue
- -
- -
Christopher /Gailen Krug
29- 117 -21 -44 -0036
$341,600
$320,000
Increase to
5232 Lockloy Drive
$380,000
Thomas Awsumb
18- 028 -24 -11- 0076
$413,900
$353,000
Reduce to
4703 Towne Road
$370,000
Gregory G. Roth
20- 028 -24 -32 -0065
$145,400
$127,000
Sustain
5801 Drew Avenue South .
Rodney J. Olson
08- 116 -21 -24 -0008
$269,100
Sustain
5804 Kemrich Drive
Joseph H. Anderson
07- 028 -24 -43 -0059
$219,100
$208,000
Sustain
104 Branson Street
Page 1
Minutes/Edina Board of Review /April 19,1999
Page 2
Assessors
Owners'
Board
Name /Address
PID Number
Est. Mkt. Value
Value
Action
Raymond H. Ehlers
30- 028 -24 -43 -0023
$144,900
$136,900
Sustain
4212 70th Street
-
Jacqueline S. Mithun
18- 028 -24 -44 -0067
$205,100
$195,000
Increase to
5308 Halifax Avenue
$245,000
Andy A. Poncius
31- 028 -24 -22 -0074
$181,600
$170,000
Reduce, to
4909 Trillium Lane
$174,000
Lowel /Patricia Johnson
33- 117 -21 -33 -0049
$168,000
$145,000
Sustain
6004 Hansen Road
-Scot M- -Busyri - - - - -- -- - --
- 18= 028 =24 �
Minutes/Edina Board of Review /April 19,1999
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
5300 Glenbrae Circle, PID No. 32- 117 -21 -11 -0023 at $320,000.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Maetzold, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
5226 Green Farms Road, PID No. 30- 117 -21 -34 -0026 at $568,000.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
6805 Dakota Trail, PID No. 06- 116 -21 -43 -0032 at $699,600.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
6109 Ridgeway Road, PID No. 32- 117 -21 -43 -0041 at $257,100.
Page 3
Assessors
Owners'
Board
Name /Address
PID Number
Est. Mkt. Value
Value
Action
Robert Quirk
06- 116 -21 -14 -0063
$290,400
Sustain
6505 Nordic Drive
John E. Bryan
33- 117 -21 -23 -0017
$214,400
Sustain
5701 Code Avenue
Phyllis S. Locke
31- 117 -21 -24 -0081
$395,800
Sustain
6601 Field Way
Dr. George W. Lund
06- 116 -21 -42 -0022
$418,800
Sustain
6409 Indian Hills Road
Dorothy Kronlokken- -
19- 028 -24 -31 -0125
$104,200
- - _
Sustain
5909 Ashcroft Avenue
Edina Hawthorn Suites
32- 028 -24 -34 -0025
$8,946,0000
$7,800,000
Sustain
3400 Edinborou h Way
Heritage of Edina
29- 028 -24 -21 -00009
$3,458,000
Sustain
3450 & 3456 Heritage Drive
29- 028 -24 -21 -00099
$2,371,400
3434 Rembrandt
29- 028 -24 -21 -00101
$3,352,000
3420 Roybet
29- 028 -24 -21 -00010
$2,584,500
29- 028 -24 -21 -00100
$50,1000
Frank Cardarelle
33- 117 -21 -34- 0122
$412,400
Sustain
6125 Wilr an Avenue
obert G. Winter
19- 028 -24 -14 -0075
$217,800
Sustain
00 Philbrook Lane
Mona Andrews
04- 116 -21 -34 -0056
$152,100
Sustain
5132 Abercrombie Drive
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
5300 Glenbrae Circle, PID No. 32- 117 -21 -11 -0023 at $320,000.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Maetzold, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
5226 Green Farms Road, PID No. 30- 117 -21 -34 -0026 at $568,000.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
6805 Dakota Trail, PID No. 06- 116 -21 -43 -0032 at $699,600.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
6109 Ridgeway Road, PID No. 32- 117 -21 -43 -0041 at $257,100.
Page 3
Minutes/Edina Board of Review _pril 19, 1999
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to increase the Estimated Market Value. of.-.
5309 Blake Road, PID No. 29- 117 -21 -33 -0004 from $137,200 to $171,100. - - - - - --
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold J
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
5632 Chowen Avenue, PID No. 20- 028 -24 -23 -0102 at $176,100.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried. - -
Motion by Member Maetzold, seconded by Member Hovland to decrease the Estimated Market Value
of 7200 France Avenue South, PID No. 31- 028 -24 -14 -0001 from $2,969,000 to $2,511,000.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Faust, seconded by Member Kelly to decrease the Estimated Market Value of
5618 Concord Avenue, PID No. 19-028-24-23-0041 from $221,600 to $210,000.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Motion by Member Hovland, seconded by Member Faust to sustain the Estimated Market Value of
6321 Mildred Avenue, PID No. 04- 116 -21 -22 -0021 at $159,100.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Kelly moved, seconded by Member Faust to re -open the discussion on the property located
at 4808_ Upper Terrace. Member Kelly asked for a clarification on the reduction of the Estimated Market
Value.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold - - - — --
Motion carried.
Following a brief discussion Member Kelly made a motion that was seconded by Member Hovland to
decrease the Estimated'Market Value of 4808 Upper Terrace, PID No. 30- 028 -24 -33 -0090 from $357,000
to $320,000.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Mayor Pro -tern Maetzold adjourned the Board of Review at 6:10 P.M.
City Clerk
Page 4
0�
s
REPORURECOMMENDATION
Ljl%. AA i
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis J. Hoffman.`
... City Engineer
Date: May 3, 1999
Subject: Public Hearing:
Brookside Heights
Neighborhood Street
Resurfacing Improvement
A -184
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # II. A.
Consent ❑
Information- Only _.❑ ..._ _.
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
® To Council
Action ® Motion
® Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
If the Council determines the project to be warranted and necessary, Council shall
adopt a resolution approving Brookside Heights Neighborhood Street Resurfacing
Improvements A -184, authorize plans and specifications to be completed and bids
taken.
Info /Background: .
City staff initiated this project. The proposed project would involve reclaiming the
existing bituminous, installation of concrete curb & gutter along Oxford and Bedford
Avenue (at the request of these residents), and repaving the roadways.
Staff analyzed the project and feels that the project is feasible from an engineering
standpoint.
The Feasibility Study was submitted to Council on April 5. 1 have attached a copy of
this Feasibility Study along with Notice of Public Hearing to this report.
The estimated project cost is $260,000. Funding for this project would be from a
special assessment of approximately $1,300 per all assessable lots or uni s. The
residents who receive concrete curb & gutter will incur an additional �$ per
assessable lot for a total of $2,100 per assessable lot. g
w9 , FEASIBILITY STUDY - A184
o e t4 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
�° CITY OF EDINA
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
AND CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD
APRIL 5, 1999
LOCATION: Oxford Avenue from Interlachen Boulevard to end of cul -de -sac, Bedford
Avenue, William Avenue, and Hankerson Avenue South from Interlachen
Boulevard to West 52 "d Street, West 51 St Street from Oxford Avenue to
Hankerson Avenue South, West 52 Id Street from Bedford Avenue to
Hankerson Avenue South, Grandview Lane, and 53`d Street West from
Grandview Lane to Vernon Avenue.
1010011011-1
Project Location
f
PAVEMENT
PAVEMENT
3 & GUTTER
INITIATION & ISSUES: This project was staff initiated by the Edina Engineering Department as part
of the neighborhood street reconstruction program. The street department
requested that these streets be reconstructed due to the poor pavement
condition.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing roadways were constructed during the years of 1956 (Oxford,
Bedford, & William Avenue's) and 1966 (Hankerson Avenue, West 51St &
West 52 "d Street's). The roadways in this neighborhood consist of 22 foot to
28 foot wide bituminous rural and urban sections. The pavements are in
relatively poor condition throughout the neighborhood. All of the pavements
are very brittle with major block cracking throughout. The roadways of
Feasibility Study
Brookside Heights Neighborhood
April 5, 1999
Page 2
Bedford Avenue, Oxford Avenue, and West 52nd Street have numerous
patches. These roadways appear to be at the end of their useful life;
overlaying or seal- coating this pavement would not be feasible. The majority
of the neighborhood has existing concrete curb & gutter. Two streets,
Bedford Avenue and one block of Oxford Avenue do not have concrete curb
and gutter. Bituminous curbs exist sporadically on both Oxford and Bedford
Avenue. These bituminous curbs have been placed to prevent erosion on
the steeper grades between West 51s' Street and Interlachen Boulevard.
Bedford Avenue and Oxford Avenue also contain large trees adjacent to the
roadway that will need to be protected during the proposed construction.
Pavement condition on Bedford Avenue
Two residences along Bedford Avenue have bituminous parking pads
adjacent to the roadway. Driveway curb cuts for these properties will be
addressed during final design.
Parking pull -out along Bedford Avenue
Feasibility Study
Brookside Heights Neighborhood
April 5, 1999
Page 3
Drainage problems also exist at every intersection with Interlachen
Boulevard. Regrading of these intersections will be addressed during final
design.
IMPROVEMENT: This project includes both reclaiming the roadway and also adding concrete
curb and gutter to areas where curb and gutter currently do not exist.
Reclaiming the existing bituminous is a process that grinds up the existing
roadway, and regrades the road bed. Then any excess material is removed
and the roadway will be repaved with a two and one -half to three inch
bituminous pavement. Concrete curb and gutter will be placed along Bedford
Avenue and one block of Oxford Avenue. Utilities such as water and sanitary
services will be analyzed during the final design to determine if any of the
services need to be replaced. An analysis of the storm sewer system will
also be completed during the final design to see if any of homes identified
with sump pumps can be accommodated with a storm sewer connection.
The intersection of Bedford Avenue and West 52nd Street will also need to be
analyzed for storm sewer. Currently surface water at this intersection travels
overland to the southwest and down a very steep grade to a pond located
north of Edina Villa Apartments.
Corner of West 52nd Street and Bedford Avenue
The initial sump pump survey indicated that a number of homes in this
neighborhood have existing sump pumps. City staff will analyze extending
the existing storm sewer system to provide underground stubs to
accommodate these homes.
A neighborhood informational packet was sent to the homeowners and an
informational meeting was also held to gather data and answer any
questions the homeowners had. Seven residents attended this informational
meeting. See attached informational packet.
Feasibility Study
Brookside Heights Neighborhood
April 5, 1999
Page 4
A
T`m
111 11AEP11 11111
MT] FM I ITT
PEEN I
w
7
nsc
A �
Homes with sump pumps
RIGHT -OF -WAY: Adequate right -of -way exists.
FEASIBILITY: This project is feasible from an engineering / city standpoint.
EASEMENTS: No additional easements will be required.
COMPLETION: 1999 Construction Season (June- August)
ASSESSMENTS: Two different special assessments will be assessed depending upon the
addition of concrete curb and gutter. The special assessment for
reclaiming. the pavement only will be approximately $1,300 per
assessable lot or unit and will be levied against all of the residents along
Oxford Avenue from Interlachen Boulevard to end of cul -de -sac, Bedford
Avenue, William Avenue, and Hankerson Avenue South from Interlachen
Boulevard to West 52nd Street, West 51St Street from Oxford Avenue to
Hankerson Avenue South, West 52nd Street from Bedford Avenue to
Hankerson_ Avenue South, Grandview Lane, and 53`d. Street West from
Grandview Lane to Vernon Avenue. The twin homes located along
Grandview Lane will be assessed per each unit. A special assessment for
the addition of concrete curb and gutter will be approximately $700 per
assessable lot and will be added to the $1300 reclaiming portion for a
total of $2,100 per assessable lot for all residents along Bedford Avenue
between Interlachen Boulevard and West 52nd Street and Oxford Avenue
between Interlachen Boulevard and West 51St Street. The residences. of
5215, 5221, 5237, 5313, and 5321 Interlachen Boulevard abut either Oxford,
Bedford, William, or Hankerson Avenues with their side yards, therefore
these residences would be assessed 1/3 of the per unit cost for the
reclaiming cost and -or the addition of curb and gutter.
Feasibility Study
Brookside Heights Neighborhood
April 5, 1999
Page 5
PROJECT COSTS:
PROJECT SCHEDULE:
The total estimated construction cost for reclaiming pavement process
is $164,000. The estimated construction cost does not include utility
upgrades. Any utility upgrades will be funded through the respective utility
fund. The estimated project cost is $203,000, which includes indirect costs
of 22.5 %, including engineering, clerical, and finance costs. The additional
estimated construction cost for adding concrete curb & gutter is
$46,000. The estimated project cost is $57,000, which includes indirect
costs of 22.5 %, including engineering, clerical, and finance costs. Funding
for the entire project will be from a combination of special assessment and
utility funds. See attached summary of the Project Cost Estimate.
.... _ _ __. _ __
The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint:
Council Orders Public Hearing .............. ..........................April 5, 1999
Receive Feasibility Report ..................... ..........................April 5,1999
Public Hearing ............................... ............................May 3, 1999
BidOpening .. ............................... ...........................June 10, 1999
Award Contract .............................. ...........................June 15, 1999
Begin Construction ...............................................
Complete Construction ...................... .....................September, 1999
GZNA� �l
awe SURVEY
v ay CITY OF EDINA
The City of Edina's Public Works Staff has determined that your roadway is at a point where additional
surface treatments or straight asphalt overlays would not be cost effective. The Engineering staff is
proposing a full depth reclamation method for your street. This technique is approximately one -half the cost
of traditional reconstruction methods and causes considerably less disruption during construction. This
method involves grinding -up the existing roadway pavement then regrading and paving the street. This
project could be constructed during the summer of 1999, with the public hearing process being held this
winter. More information will follow regarding costs, public hearing schedules, etc.
The majority of the neighborhood does not have concrete curb and gutter. Installation of concrete curb and
gutter benefits the surface water drainage and the structural integrity of a roadway. The Engineering staff is
requesting your input regarding the installation of curb and gutters along your street. Please complete the
following survey and return it in the enclosed stamped envelope by November 6th. Please contact
Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 if you have any questions.
Which curb & gutter system, if any, do you prefer? Please check one box.
❑■
Bulkhead Curb and Gutter:
• Best control of surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Most expensive (potentially adds $800 to $1000 per assessable lot)
❑ Surmountable Curb and Gutter:
• Controls surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Lower cost (potentially adds $600 to $800 per assessable lot)
❑ No curb or gutter: Existing condition.
• Least control of surface water runoff
• No yard / roadway definition.
• Prone to reducing structural strength of edge of roadway.
OTHER COMMENTS:
e..
February 23, 1999
Brookside Heights Neighborhood Area Residents
Edina, MN
Re: Resident Letter No. 1
Informational Meeting Announcement
Brookside Heights Roadway Improvements
City of Edina
Dear Resident:
As many of you know the City of Edina has initiated the process for roadway improvements for
your neighborhood. The City of Edina is hosting an Informational Meeting regarding this
project to be held on Tuesday, March 16 at Arneson Acres Park, lower level meeting
room, at 8:00 PM. Arneson Acres is located at 4711 West 70th Street, two blocks east of Hwy
100.
The meeting format will consist of a short presentation followed by an informal question and
answer session. The presentation will cover scope of work and average assessment costs. If
you cannot attend this meeting please contact me at 826 -0443 and I will answer any questions
you may have.
Sincerely,
00%
Wayne Wayne D. Houle, PE
Assistant City Engineer
Attachment
c: File
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 1 DD (612) 826 -0379
MEN
S i
AVEMENT
CURB & GUTTER
March 4, 1999
Re: Resident Letter No. 2
Project Information
Brookside Heights Neighborhood Roadway Improvements
Dear Brookside Heights Neighborhood Area Residents:
Due to the interest in this project I am sending out this informational letter describing the project, the
potential schedule, and potential assessments.
This project will consist of reclaiming the roadway as shown on the attached Reclaiming Process Sheet.
The results of the fall survey indicated a desire for concrete curb and gutters where they currently do not
exist. Engineering staff will also look at any surface drainage problems that might exist and ways to help
alleviate these problems. The construction for this project should take approximately three to eight
weeks depending on the extent of work to be completed (utility work generally will take longer than just
repaving).
The proposed preliminary schedule is as follows:
Informational Meeting..... March 16, 1999 Complete Construction ...... August / September, 1999
Public Hearing ........... End of April, 1999 Final Assessment Hearing ......... Fall of 1999 or 2000
Begin Construction ....... June / July, 1999
Please keep in mind that this project is "proposed only" until the City Council orders it at a Public Hearing.
Also, you will be notified of the public hearing date at least ten days prior to the public hearing.
This project is setup with two different per lot preliminary assessment rates. One rate is for areas that will
have the pavement reclaimed only, the other is for areas proposed to receive new concrete curb and
gutter along with pavement reclaiming. Any lots that are adjacent to, but do not front the proposed
reclaimed roadway will be assessed at one -third the cost. Assessments are typically added to the tax roll
after the final assessment hearing and can be spread -out over 10 years. Proposed Assessments per lot
for this project are ±$1,300 for pavement reclaiming areas only and ±$2,100 for pavement reclaiming
areas plus new concrete curb and gutters. Any utility work will be charged to the City Utility Fund.
One most frequently asked question is "Why don't regular taxes cover a project such as this ? ": Money
for roadways from the City's General Fund can only be spent on general maintenance of City roadways
such as cracksealing and sealcoating. Minnesota State Law only permits cities to establish Utility Funds
to maintain and upgrade water and sewers systems. Roadways and sidewalks are not yet included
therefor improvements for these types of projects need to be assessed.
It is to be hoped that this letter will answer most questions you might have. This information will be
reiterated at the informational meeting, if you have any additional questions or input and can not make it
to this meeting please call me at 826 -0443.
Sincer ly,
Wayne D. Houle, PE
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 826 -0379
STREET RECLAIMING PROCESS
Often times a roadway may contain many patches and a lot of cracking, but may not be at a point of total
reconstruction. Street reclaiming is a process that can be applied to these roadways. Reclaiming as
shown below is a process where a grinding machine will grind up the existing roadway using all portions of
the existing roadway. The roadway is graded and compacted then repaved. Disturbances to driveways,
yards and landscaping for areas that are not adding concrete curb and gutters is minimal and the City will
repair all disturbances that are associated with the project. Disturbances to driveways, yards and
landscaping for areas that are adding concrete curb and gutters will be affected depending on the layout of
the new curb and gutter; however the City will also repair any disturbances that are associated with the
project. Reclaiming is typically about 1/3 the cost of reconstructing the roadway.
Streets before the reclaiming process.
Reclaiming (grinding) Machine
New Pavement without curb and gutter. New pavement with curb and gutter.
SUMMARY OF COST ANALYSIS
BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD
CITY OF EDINA
SCHEDULE A:
RECLAIM PAVEMENT PROCESS
Subtotal Construction Cost $ 1499000
10 $ 1..5,000
% Contingency
Total Construction Cost $ 164,000
15% Engineering & Clerical $ 25,000
Total Construction Cost $ 189,000
7.5% Finance $ 14,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST (A) $ 203,000
NOTE: Does not include any utility costs.
SCHEDULE B:
ADDITIONAL CURB & GUTTER
Subtotal Construction Cost
42,000
10% Contingency $ 4,000
Total Construction Cost $ 46,000
15% Engineering & Clerical $ 7,000
Total Construction Cost $ 53,000
7.5% Finance $ 4,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST (B) $ 57,000
GAMPROWA184/MISC/QUANTITIES -A184 Cost EstimateAs Pagel 7:21 PM3/31/99
April 20, 1998
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
STREET RESURFACING AND ADDITION OF CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT A -184
BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD
The Edina City Council will meet at the Edina City'Hall on Monday; May 3, 1999 at 7:00 PM to hold a Public
Hearing on the street recycling, bituminous resurfacing, and addition of concrete curb and gutters on Oxford
Avenue from lnterlachen Boulevard to end of cul -de -sac, Bedford Avenue, William Avenue, and Hankerson
Avenue South from Interlachen Boulevard to West 52 "d Street, West 51" Street from Oxford Avenue to
Hankerson Avenue South, West 52 "d Street from Bedford Avenue to Hankerson Avenue South, Grandview
Lane, and West 53`d Street from Grandview Lane to Vernon Avenue. This hearing is being conducted
under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.
This hearing has been called as a recommendation from staff. The proposed project would be constructed
in 1999 with the assessment hearing occurring in late September or early October. The estimated project
cost is $260,000. The cost of the project will be funded by special assessment. The estimated cost for
streets where reclaiming the pavement only occurs will be $1,300 per assessable lot or unit. The estimated
cost for streets where reclaiming the pavement and the addition of concrete curb and gutter occurs will be
$2,100 per assessable lot or unit. Both assessments can be divided over a ten year period with interest
accumulating on the unpaid balance.
The area proposed to be assessed the cost of the proposed improvement includes:
Lots 2 thru 13, Blk 1; Lots 4 thru 23, Blk 2; Lots 1 & 2, 6 thru 23, Blk 3; Lots 1 & 2, 5 thru 23, Blk 4; Lots 1
thru 11, Blk 5; Lots 1 thru .12, Blk 6; Lots 1 thru 24, Blk 7; Lots 1 thru 24, Blk 8; and Lots 1 thru 24, Blk 9,
"Brookside Heights" Addition; Lots 1 thru 6, Blk 1; Lots 1 thru 6, Blk 2, Replat of Part of Grandview Plateau;
and Lots 1 & 2, BIk 1; Rowland's Addition.
Your receipt of this notice is an indication that property whose ownership is listed to you is among those
properties which are considered to be benefited by the improvement.
Any inquiries, comments and /or suggestions you may have regarding this improvement may be forwarded
to the City Council or Engineering Department prior to the hearing or presented at the hearing itself. If you
desire additional information, please call Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM,
Monday through Friday. The City Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close
of the hearing.
Thank you,
Francis J. Ho an
Director of Public Works and City Engineer
FJH /clf
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
o REPORT/RECOM MEN DATION
e ,ryroAPO4A��O e
1tltl8
To: Mayor & City Council
Agenda Item # II.B.
From: Francis J. Hoffman
Consent
❑
City Engineer _
Information Only
Date: May 3, 1999
Mgr. Recommends
❑ To HRA
® To Council
Subject: Public Hearing: Skyline
Action
® Motion
Drive & Blossom Court
® Resolution
Neighborhood Street
❑ Ordinance
Resurfacing Improvement
❑ Discussion
A -185
Recommendation:
If the Council determines the project to be warranted and necessary, Council shall
adopt a resolution approving Skyline Drive & Blossom Court Neighborhood Street
Resurfacing Improvement A -185, authorize plans and specifications to be completed
and bids taken.
Info /Background:
City staff initiated this project. The proposed project would involve reclaiming the
existing bituminous, and repaving the roadways.
Staff analyzed the project and feels that the project is feasible from an engineering
standpoint.
The Feasibility Study was submitted to Council on April 5.. 1 have attached a copy of
this Feasibility Study along with Notice of Public Hearing to this report, and a resident
letter.
The estimated project cost is $74,000. Funding for this project would be from a special
assessment of approximately $2,900 per all assessable lots.
w9 ^rte FEASIBILITY STUDY- A185
ok e tA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
�° CITY OF EDINA
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
SKYLINE DRIVE & BLOSSOM COURT
APRIL 5, 1999
LOCATION: Skyline Drive from Interlachen Boulevard to end of cul -de -sac and Blossom
Court from Skyline Drive to end of cul -de -sac.
INITIATION & ISSUES:
Ise I I_ I — I 1
50�
N1:
50:
5U2
50i
•A:
50i
9N
X510
ti11
11
51.
513
51I
51�
llu.
This project was staff initiated by the Edina Engineering Department as part
of the neighborhood street reconstruction program. The street department
requested that these streets be reconstructed due to the poor pavement
condition.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing roadway was constructed in 1965 and consists of a 24 foot to 28
foot wide bituminous rural section. The pavement is in relatively poor
condition with major block cracking and numerous patches throughout. This
roadway appears to be at the end of its useful life; meaning overlaying or
sealcoating this pavement would not be feasible.
Feasibility Study
Skyline Drive / Blossom Court
April 5, 1999
Page 2
Pavement condition on Skyline Drive
IMPROVEMENT: This project involves reclaiming the existing bituminous, a process that grinds up the
existing roadway, regrading the roadway bed, removing any excess material, and
repaving the roadway with a two and one -half to three inch bituminous pavement. A
neighborhood survey was sent to all residents last fall asking for their opinion of
installing concrete curb and gutter, see attached survey. The majority of the
neighbors responding, seven out of eleven, do not prefer to have concrete curb and
gutter installed at this time. A neighborhood informational packet was sent to the
owners and an informational meeting was also held, see attached informational
packet. Input from the eight neighbors attending included residents from Blossom
Court not wanting the project at this time and comments relating to the drainage of
the roadway at the most southerly and westerly cul -de -sac. The storm sewer catch
basin at the southerly end of Skyline Drive will need to be addressed through the
final design process for a possible rebuild of the catch basin. Initial survey of the
neighborhood revealed a sump pump at 5020 and 5126 Skyline Drive. City staff will
investigate the need for a subsurface drainage system for these two residences.
W
Feasibility Study
Skyline Drive / Blossom Court
April 5, 1999
Page 3
Storm Sewer at Skyline Drive cul -de -sac.
RIGHT -OF -WAY: Adequate right -of -way exists.
FEASIBILITY: This project is feasible from an engineering / city standpoint.
EASEMENTS: No additional easements will be required.
COMPLETION: 1999 Construction Season (June- August)
ASSESSMENTS: A special assessment of approximately $2,900 per assessable lot will be
levied against the residents along Skyline Drive and Blossom Court. The
residences of 5501 and 5419 Interlachen Boulevard abut Skyline Drive with
their side yards, therefore these residences would be assessed 1/3 of the
per unit cost.
PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated construction cost is $60,000. The estimated
construction cost does not include storm sewer upgrades. Any storm sewer
upgrades will be funded through the stormwater utility fund. The estimated
project cost is $74,000, which includes indirect costs of 22.5 %, including
engineering, clerical, and finance costs. Funding for the entire project will be
from a combination of special assessment and stormwater utility. See
attached summary of the Project Cost Estimate.
Feasibility Study
Skyline Drive / Blossom Court
April 5, 1999
Page 4
•
PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint:
Council Orders Public Hearing .............. ..........................April 5, 1999
Receive Feasibility Report .................... ..........................April 5, 1999
Public Hearing .. ............................... ............................May 3, 1999
BidOpening ... ............................... .:.........................June 10, 1999
Award Contract .............................. ...........................June 15, 1999
Begin Construction .. ............................... ..................End- June,1999
Complete Construction ........................ ........................August, 1999
1"r4 A,
owe r� SURVEY
�o CITY OF EDINA
• �TiR1`OM�6�
The City of Edina °s Public Works Staff has determined that your roadway is at a point where additional
surface treatments or straight asphalt overlays would not be cost effective. The Engineering staff is
proposing a full depth reclamation method for your street. This technique is approximately one -half the cost
of traditional reconstruction methods and causes considerably less disruption during construction. This
method involves grinding -up the existing roadway pavement then regrading and paving the street. This
project could be constructed during the summer of 1999, with the public hearing process being held this
winter. More information will follow regarding costs, public hearing schedules, etc.
The majority of the neighborhood does not have concrete curb and gutter. Installation of concrete curb and
gutter benefits the surface water drainage and the structural integrity of a roadway. The Engineering staff is
requesting your input regarding the installation of curb and gutters along your street. Please complete the
following survey and return it in the enclosed stamped envelope by November 6th. Please contact
Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 if you have any questions.
Which curb & gutter system, if any, do you prefer? Please check one box.
U
Bulkhead Curb and Gutter:
• Best control of surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Most expensive (potentially adds $800 to $1000 per assessable lot)
❑ Surmountable Curb and Gutter:
• Controls surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Lower cost (potentially adds $600 to $800 per assessable lot)
❑ No curb or gutter: Existing condition.
• Least control of surface water runoff
• No yard / roadway definition.
• Prone to reducing structural strength of edge of roadway.
OTHER COMMENTS:
Address:
l
n% yWS 'a
r
February 23, 1999
Skyline Drive and Blossom Court Area Residents
Edina, MN
Re: Resident Letter No. 1
Informational Meeting Announcement
Skyline Drive and Blossom Court Roadway Improvements
City of Edina
Dear Resident:
As many of you know the City of Edina has initiated the process for roadway improvements for
your neighborhood. The City of Edina is hosting an Informational Meeting regarding this
project to be held on Tuesday, March 16 at Arneson Acres Park, lower level meeting
room, at 7:00 PM. Arneson Acres is located at 4711 West 70th Street, two blocks east of Hwy
100.
The meeting format will consist of a short presentation followed by an, informal question and
answer session. The presentation will cover scope of work and average assessment costs. If
you cannot attend this meeting please contact me at 826 -0443 and I will answer any questions
you may have.
Sincerely,
Wayne D. Houle, PE
Assistant City Engineer
Attachment
c: File
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
ARM 1A /rrT rf)TW CT[?rrT FAY lL,171 R7l._l1ZQ(
IMPROVEMENT LOCATION' Skyline Drive and Blossom Court
1
I 5
11 5524
I 5520
I
I I I
I
I I
HOS
I SSUO
1 53x4
I5:.7-d
1
5332
419
5324
'
. .............
_................. _•__,__.___.___....__
___............___..._......___..._...........__......._........-"..._.__.._......
94TERLACHEN WZ
.......__._.........._.........
__._... _..............
.......... ..............._.
I
3
x'06
to
5001
5509
5505
5501
5419
5475
5707
5401
5343
i
1
5001
5333
5329
5.41.
y
603_......__
.
...
.....
5073 . ...
501
„_.. _ _. ... ....._...
i0U9
5020
-1
5004
5005
SM'L
5016
5017
50,
15013
5513
5020
I
t
5021
5060
5P7,
SODC
SR4
5028
I
t
6029
502
SM2
.503
5060
5051
5074
5101
6096
1
5�
5100
I
E=7
5020
507
5010
501 _
5104
SU44
5109
1
51C
5100
5101
5108
5113
510
$106
MM
v '
5109
510
5117
N
5121
$1,2
5109
S1
5112
5113
511
5120.
i
5121
512
5116
1
5125
512
5126
1
1
512.
5120
j
512631
5121
.�
513:
5120
5117
513,
5121
5147
5125
5127
514.
March 4, 1999
.. ; i,c i.
Re: Resident Letter No. 2
Project Information
Skyline .Drive and Blossom Court Roadway Improvements
Dear Skyline Drive and Blossom Court Area Residents:
Due to the interest in this project I am I sending out this informational letter describing the project, the
potential schedule, and potential assessments.
This project will consist of reclaiming the roadway as shown on the attached Reclaiming Process Sheet.
No concrete curb and gutters will be proposed for this neighborhood due to the curb and gutter surveys
that were returned last fall. Engineering staff will also look at any surface drainage problems that might
exist and ways to help alleviate these problems. The construction for this project should take
approximately three to eight weeks depending on the extent of work to be completed (utility work
generally will take longer than just repaving).
The proposed preliminary schedule is as follows:
Informational Meeting...... March 16, 1999 Complete Construction...... August / September, 1999
Public Hearing ............ End -of April, 1999 Final Assessment Hearing ......... Fall of 1999. or 2000
Begin Construction ......... June / July, 1999
Please keep in mind that this project is "proposed only" until the City Council orders it at a Public Hearing.
Also, you will be notified of the public hearing date at least ten days prior to the public hearing.
The assessments for this project are preliminarily setup on a per lot basis, meaning all lots will be
assessed equally. Any lots that are adjacent to, but do not front the proposed reclaimed roadway will be
assessed at one -third the cost. Assessments are typically added to the tax roll after the final assessment
hearing and can be spread -out over 10 years. Proposed Assessments for this project are ±$2,900 per lot
and includes only the pavement reclaiming portion, any utility work will be charged to the City Utility Fund.
One most frequently asked question is "Why don't regular taxes cover a project such as this ? ": Money
for roadways from the City's General Fund can only be spent on general maintenance of City roadways
such. as cracksealing and sealcoating. Minnesota State Law only permits cities to establish Utility Funds
to maintain and upgrade water and sewers systems. Roadways and sidewalks are not yet included
therefor improvements for these types of projects need to be assessed.
It is to be hoped that this letter will answer most questions you might have. This information will be
reiterated at the informational meeting, if you have any additional questions or input and can not make it
to this meeting please call me at 826 -0443.
Sincerely,
Wayne D. Houle, PE
Assistant City Engineer
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
STREET RECLAIMING PROCESS
Often times a roadway may contain many patches and a lot of cracking, but may not be at a point of total
reconstruction. Street reclaiming is a process that can be applied to these roadways. Reclaiming as
shown below is a process where a grinding machine will grind up the existing roadway using all portions of
the existing roadway. The roadway is graded and compacted then repaved. Disturbances to driveways,
yards and landscaping for areas that are not adding concrete curb and gutters is minimal and the City will
repair all disturbances that are associated with the project. Disturbances to driveways, yards and
landscaping for areas that are adding concrete curb and gutters will be affected depending on the layout of
the new curb and gutter; however the City will also repair any disturbances that are associated with the
project. Reclaiming is typically about 1/3 the cost of reconstructing the roadway.
Streets before the reclaiming process.
Reclaiming (grinding) Machine
New Pavement without curb and gutter. New pavement with curb and gutter.
Subtotal Construction Cost $ 54,000
10% Contingency $ 5,000
Total Construction Cost $ 60,000
.15% Engineering`& Clerical
Total Construction Cost $ 69,000
7.5% Finance
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 74,000
NOTE: Does not include any utility costs.
G: /IMPRbv /A185 /MISC /QUANTITIES - A185 Cost EstimateAs . Page 1
6:32 AM4/1/99
_1
5124 Skyline Drive
Edina MN 55436
April 23,1999
Edina City Council
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424 -1394
Dear Council Members:
We support the Skyline Drive /Blossom Court street resurfacing
project and hope you will vote to proceed on May 3'd. We believe
that all but a few of the residents here also approve of the project.
The street needs the work and now is the time to do it while
recycling the old surface is still an option.
Yours, truly,
�i
Jerry and "JAidy' Bergfalk ��
A
April 20, 1998
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
STREET RESURFACING
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT A -185
SKYLINE DRIVE NEIGHBORHOOD:
SKYLINE DRIVE AND BLOSSOM COURT
C."itV
The Edina City Council will meet at the Edina City Hall on Monday, May 3, 1999 at 7:00 PM to hold a Public
Hearing on the street recycling, bituminous resurfacing on Skyline Drive from Interlachen Boulevard to end
of cul -de -sac and Blossom Court from Skyline Drive to end of cul -de -sac. This hearing is being conducted
under the authority granted by. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.
This hearing has been called as a recommendation from staff. The proposed project would be constructed
in 1999 with the assessment hearing occurring in late September or early October. The estimated project
cost is $74,000. The cost of the project will be funded by special assessment. The estimated cost per
assessable Jot is $2,900 and._could be divided over a ten year. period with interest accumulating on the
unpaid balance.
The area proposed to be assessed the cost of the proposed improvement includes:
Lot 1, Blk 1, Leary's Addition; Lots 1 & 2, Skyline Addition - Dalquist Replat; Lots 3, 5 & 6, and 9
thru 28, "Skyline" Addition; Lots 1 & 3, Blk 1, Hill's Interlachen Addition.
Your receipt of this notice is an indication that property whose ownership is listed to you is among those
properties which are considered to be benefited by the improvement.
Any inquiries, comments and /or suggestions you may have regarding. this improvement may be forwarded
to the City Council or Engineering Department prior to the hearing or presented at the hearing itself. If you
desire additional information, please call Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM,
Monday through Friday. The City Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close
of the hearing.
Thank you,
Francis J. Ho ma , P.E.
Director of Public.Works and City Engineer
FJH /clf
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
f /
o e
• '�8
0
To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # I,. c.
From: Francis J. Hoffmaft)� Consent ❑
'City ngineer Information Only -
Y
Date: May 3, 1999 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
To Council
Subject: Public Hearing: Highlands Action ® Motion
Park Neighborhood Street ® Resolution
Resurfacing Improvement ❑ Ordinance
A -186. .
❑ Discussion
Recommendation:
If the Council determines the project to be warranted and necessary, Council shall
adopt a resolution approving Highlands Park Neighborhood Street Resurfacing
Improvement A -1.86, authorize plans and specifications to be completed and bids
taken.
Info /Background:
City staff initiated this project. The proposed project would involve reclaiming the
existing bituminous, and repaving the roadways.
Staff analyzed the project and feels that the. project is feasible from an engineering
standpoint.
The Feasibility Study was submitted to Council on April 5. 1 have attached a copy of
this Feasibility Study along with Notice of Public Hearing to this report, and a resident
letter.
The estimated project cost is $487,000. Funding for this project would be from ,a
special assessment of approximately $2,500 to $3,000. per all assessable lots.
ow9e 1�� FEASIBILITY STUDY - A186
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Cn
.ay CITY OF EDINA
d..
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
HIGHLANDS PARK NEIGHBORHOOD
APRIL 5, 1999
LOCATION: Dundee Road from Northwood Drive to Ayrshire Boulevard, Mirror Lakes
Drive from Interlachen Boulevard to Ayrshire Boulevard, Chantrey Road and
Glengarry Parkway from Northwood Drive to Ayrshire Boulevard, Doncaster
Way from Highland Park Shelter to Vernon Avenue, and Merritt Circle, as
shown below in bold.
Project Location
INITIATION & ISSUES: This project was staff initiated by the Edina Engineering Department as part
of the neighborhood street reconstruction program. The street department
requested that these streets be reconstructed due to the poor pavement
condition.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing roadways were constructed during the years of 1957 to 1962.
The roadways in this neighborhood typically consist of a 28 to 30 foot wide
bituminous rural section with some existing concrete curb & gutter (Ayrshire
Boulevard and northerly end of Doncaster Way). The pavement condition
varies throughout the neighborhood, but generally it is in relatively poor
condition.
Street grades within the neighborhood vary from flat -level areas along
Dundee Road to Glengarry Parkway, to steeper grades along the north end
of Mirror Lakes Drive and also the south end of Doncaster Way. The level
Feasibility Study
Highlands Park Neighborhood
April 5, 1999
Page 2
areas are showing signs of major distress such as patches and various
cracking mainly due to the age and poor drainage of the roadway. The
steeper areas also indicate age cracking with major edge patching that is
due to surface runoff. Concrete curb and gutter exists only along Ayrshire
Boulevard. The pavement throughout this neighborhood appears to be at the
end of its useful life; overlaying or sealcoating this pavement would not be
feasible.
Storm sewer for this area exists only adjacent to Highland Park. The initial
sump pump surveys indicate a number of homes with sump pumps scattered
throughout the neighborhood.
Pavement Condition along Doncaster Way
Pavement Condition Mirror Lakes Drive & Northwood Road
IMPROVEMENT: This project involves reclaiming the existing bituminous pavement, a process
that grinds up the existing roadways, regrades the road bed, removes all
Feasibility Study
Highlands Park Neighborhood
April 5, 1999
Page 3
excess material and repaves the roadways with a two and one -half to three
inch bituminous pavement. Any existing curb and gutter that needs
replacement will be replaced at this time. A neighborhood survey was sent
last fall to all residents who do not have existing concrete curb and gutter
asking for their opinion of installing concrete curb and gutter, see attached
copy of survey. The majority of the neighbors responding, 25 out of 43, do
not prefer to have concrete curb and gutter installed at this time. A second
survey was sent at the request of residents attending the informational
meeting, to these same residents verifying the first survey. The majority of
the neighbors responding, 53 out of 94, do not prefer to have concrete curb
and gutter installed at this time. Merritt Circle is the only individual street that
has a majority in favor of curb & gutter; staff will continue to review these
results.
The initial sump survey indicated that a number of homes in this
neighborhood have existing sump pumps. City staff will analyze extending
the existing storm sewer system that will provide an underground stub to
accommodate these homes.
�■ LMOMEM101311,12' . ■ R .
Homes with sump pumps
A neighborhood informational packet was sent to these residents and an
informational meeting was also held to gather data and answer any
questions the homeowners had. Input from over 40 residents attending
included information regarding drainage around Highlands Park, mostly on
the easterly side. Drainage problems at the intersection of Doncaster Way
Feasibility Study
Highlands Park Neighborhood
April 5, 1999
Page 4
and Ayrshire Boulevard was a major concern of the residents. Two resident
letters are also attached to this report.
RIGHT -OF -WAY: Adequate right -of -way exists.
FEASIBILITY: This project is feasible from an engineering / city standpoint.
EASEMENTS: No additional easements will be required.
COMPLETION: 1999 Construction Season (June - August)
ASSESSMENTS: A special assessment of approximately $2,500 to $3,000 per assessable
lot will be levied against the residents along Dundee Road from Northwood
Drive to Ayrshire Boulevard, Mirror Lakes Drive from Interlachen Boulevard
to Ayrshire Boulevard, Chantrey Road and Glengarry Parkway from
Northwood Drive to Ayrshire Boulevard, Doncaster Way from Highland Park
Shelter to Vernon Avenue, and Merritt Circle. The range of the assessment
is contributed to various methods of calculating the park and school
property's assessment shares, a more accurate assessment number will be
given at the Public Hearing. The residents at 5501 Dundee, 5500 & 5501
Mirror Lakes Drive, 5500 & 5501 Chantrey Road, 5500 & 5501 Glengarry
Parkway, and 5605 Ayrshire Boulevard abut the project area with their side
yards; therefor these residences will be assessed 1/3 of the per unit cost.
See figure below.
Assessment Costs per lot
PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated construction cost is $394,000. The estimated
construction cost does not include storm sewer. or utility upgrades. Utility
ti
.+pars+
�
.'.. �f.y�•
��rMe
Ti'..:
COSTPER
e,.
yy�y
Hf�iiPi
ASSESSABLE LOT
113 COST
FULL COST
Assessment Costs per lot
PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated construction cost is $394,000. The estimated
construction cost does not include storm sewer. or utility upgrades. Utility
Feasibility Study
f Highlands Park Neighborhood
April 5, 1999
Page 5
upgrades will be funded through their respective utility fund. The estimated
project cost is $487,000, which includes indirect costs of 22.5 %, which
includes engineering, clerical, and finance costs. Funding for the entire
project will be from a combination of special assessment and utility funds.
See attached summary of the Project Cost Estimate.
PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint:
Council Orders Public Hearing ................... .....................April 5, 1999
Receive Feasibility Report .................... ..........................April 5,1999
Public Hearing .. .............:................. ............................May 3, 1999
BidOpening . ............................... .:.........................June 10, 1999
Award Contract ............................ ...........................June 15, 1999
Begin Construction . ............................... ..................End- June,1999
Complete Construction ...................... .....................September, 1999
91�`� ltq j
SURVEY
J z �y CITY OF EDINA
The City of Edina's Public Works Staff has determined that your roadway is at a point where additional
surface treatments or straight asphalt overlays would not be cost effective. The Engineering staff is
proposing a full depth reclamation method for your street. This technique is approximately one -half the cost
of traditional reconstruction methods and causes considerably less disruption during construction. This
method involves grinding -up the existing roadway pavement then regrading and paving the street. This
project could be constructed during the summer of 1999, with the public hearing process being held this
winter. More information will follow regarding costs, public hearing schedules, etc.
The majority of the neighborhood does not have concrete curb and gutter. Installation of concrete curb and
gutter benefits the surface water drainage and the structural integrity of a roadway. The Engineering staff is
requesting your input regarding the installation of curb and gutters along your street. Please complete the
following survey and return it in the enclosed stamped envelope by November 6th. Please contact
Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 if you have any questions.
Which curb & gutter system, if any, do you prefer? Please check one box.
X
Bulkhead Curb and Gutter:
• Best control of surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Most expensive (potentially adds $800 to $1000 per assessable lot`
❑ Surmountable Curb and Gutter:
• Controls surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Lower cost (potentially adds $600 to $800 per assessable lot)
❑ No curb or gutter: Existing condition.
• Least control of surface water runoff
• No yard / roadway definition.
• Prone to reducing structural strength of edge of roadway.
OTHER COMMENTS:
A(idrPSC'
T
ems,
of Eciin"a
MYxfA %,ICYFwbp
February 23, 1999
Highlands Park Neighborhood Area Residents
Edina, MN
Re: Resident Letter No. 1
Informational Meeting Announcement
Highlands Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvements
City of Edina
Dear Resident:
As many of you know the City of Edina has initiated the process for roadway improvements for
your neighborhood. The City of Edina is hosting an Informational Meeting regarding this
project to be held on Tuesday, March 16 at Arneson Acres Park, lower level meeting
room, at 7:00 PM. Arneson Acres is located at 4711 West 70'" Street, two blocks east of Hwy
100.
The meeting format will consist of a short presentation followed by an informal question and
answer session. The presentation will cover scope of work and average assessment costs. If
you cannot attend this meeting please contact me at 826 -0443 and I will answer any questions
you may have.
Sincerely,
zz%nr la"
Wayne D. Houle, PE
Assistant City Engineer
Attachment
c: File
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 826 -0379
IMPROVEMENT LOCATION: HIGHLANDS PARK NEIGHBORHOOD
1111 11 170
vERN
I
March(..y. of
Re: Resident Letter No. 2
Project Information
Highlands Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvements
Dear Highlands Park Neighborhood Area Residents:
Due to the interest in this project l am sending out- this - informational- letter- describing the - project; the
potential schedule, and potential assessments.
This project will consist of reclaiming the roadway as shown on the attached Reclaiming Process Sheet.
No concrete curb and gutters will be proposed for this neighborhood due to the curb and gutter surveys
that were returned last fall. Engineering staff will also look at any surface drainage problems that might
exist and ways to help alleviate these problems. The construction for this project should take
approximately three to eight weeks depending on the extent of work to be completed (utility work
generally will take longer than just repaving).
The proposed preliminary schedule is as follows:
Informational Meeting...... March 16, 1999 Complete Construction ...... August / September, 1999
Public Hearing ............ End of April, 1999 Final Assessment Hearing ......... Fall of 1999 or 2000
Begin Construction ......... June / July, 1999
Please keep in mind that this project is "proposed only" until the City Council orders it at a Public Hearing.
Also, you will be notified of the public hearing date at least ten days prior to the public hearing.
The assessments for this project are preliminarily setup on a per lot basis,' meaning all lots will be
assessed equally. Any lots that are adjacent to, but do not front the proposed reclaimed roadway will be
assessed at one -third the cost. Assessments are typically added to the tax roll after the final assessment
hearing and can be spread -out over 10 years. Proposed Assessments for this project are ±$3,400 per lot
and includes only the pavement reclaiming portion, any -utility work will be charged to the City Utility Fund.
One most frequently asked question is "Why don't. regular taxes cover a project such as this ? ": Money
for roadways from the City's General Fund can only be spent on general maintenance of City roadways
such as cracksealing and sealcoating. Minnesota State Law only permits cities to establish Utility Funds
to maintain and upgrade water and sewers systems. Roadways and sidewalks are not yet included
therefor improvements for these types of projects need to be assessed.
It is to be hoped that this letter will answer most questions you might have. This information will be
reiterated at the informational meeting, if you have any additional questions or input and can. not make it
to this meeting please call me at 826 -0443.
Sincerely,
Wayne D. Houle, PE
Assistant City Engineer
City Hall
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394
(612) 927 -8861
FAX (612) 826 -0390
TDD (612) 826 -0379
STREET RECLAIMING PROCESS
Often times a roadway may contain many patches and a lot of cracking, but may not be at a point of total
reconstruction. Street reclaiming is a process that can be applied to these roadways. Reclaiming as
shown below is a process where a grinding machine will grind up the existing roadway using all portions of
the existing roadway. The roadway is graded and compacted then repaved. Disturbances to driveways,
yards and landscaping for areas that are not adding concrete curb and gutters is minimal and the City will
repair all disturbances that are associated with the project. Disturbances to driveways, yards and
landscaping for areas that are adding concrete curb and gutters will be affected depending on the layout of
the new curb and gutter; however the City will also repair any disturbances that are associated with the
project. Reclaiming is typically about 1/3 the cost of reconstructing the roadway.
Streets before the reclaiming process.
Reclaiming (grinding) Machine
New Pavement without curb and gutter. New pavement with curb and gutter.
' 911IA.l�l
ow e RE- SURVEY
�o HIGHLANDS PARK AREA
ry�A... PAVEMENT RECLAIMING PROJECT
CITY OF EDINA
As many of you know the Edina Engineering Staff conducted a neighborhood informational
meeting on March 16. About half of the attending residents requested that the neighborhood be
resurveyed for installation of curb and gutters. I've attached a postcard survey regarding this
issue. Please return this survey as soon as possible but no later than March 25. Also, please
include your street and house number for recording these results.
I've also reattached information on the different types of concrete curb and gutters. The results of
this survey will be included with the notice for Public Hearing.
Please contact Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 if you have any questions.
Bulkhead Curb and Gutter:
• Best control of surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Most expensive (potentially adds $800 to $1100 per assessable lot)
Surmountable Curb and Gutter:
• Controls surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Lower cost (potentially adds $600 to $800 per assessable lot)
SUMMARY OF COST ANALYSIS
MIRROR LAKES / HIGHLAND LAKE PAVEMENT RECLAIMING
CITY OF EDINA
Subtotal Construction Cost $ 391,000
10% Contingency $ 2,000
Total Construction Cost $ 394,000
15% Engineering & Clerical $ 59,000
Total Construction Cost $ 453,000
7.5% Finance $ 34,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 487,000
NOTE: Does not include any utility costs.
G:AMPROV/A186WISC /QUANTITIES -A186 Cost EstimateAs Pagel 6:44 AM4/1/99
K G ANDERSON
KENNETH O. ANDERSON
6209 DONCASTER WAY
MINNEAP6L16,M1NNE80YA 66438
1919) 989 -0720
PAGE 01
We moved into 5209 Doncaster way in May of 1958. We have continued
to live at this address.and have been able.to observe, over the
many years, our neighborhood grow and develop into a community.
we are still proud to,be a part.of.
Apparently other early settlers in our community.are similarly
_comfortab_r le witness the fact_ that __many- who - originally. built - - - --
their homes (as we did) are still happy campers. In addition -,
their children are eagerly returning to the home
territory where they grew up so they 'can raise their children
under the same . comforts, safety, school systems, etc., etc., that
their parents and .our villa.ge__provided.for. them over__the years.
As communities grow and-age, there are improvements that must
be addressed.` This meeting has been called to bring attention
to the several problems that have developed.
We would like to go on record, at this meeting tonight, to
express our thoughts regarding the improvements that would
benefit (not only us) but that part of the community which is being
considered for redevelopment.
DRAINAGE. It has been a major problem.
After every rainfall a lake forms at the T- crossing of Doncaster Way
and Croyden Lane. , finally and laughingly (out of sheer, desperation)
call it "Lake Donaster." The drainage originally provided for the
runoff was so inadequate to start with so that, with J ust a few
leaves and /or grass clippings moving along all the streets that drain
into this one small, inadequate point, we have total back -up - -thus grows
11Lake Doncaster!" We are thankful for our neighbor who dons hip. boots,
gets rake, shovel and what- ever'is necessary (winter or summer!) to open
a path for the water to make its way into the lake.
Many years ago the City installed a s1uiceway in the parking
lot on Doncaster Way that, supposedly, would take care of
the runoff. It was quickly learned that the sluiceway was
far too high above the natural drainage level to carry any water away.
Subsequently, that first sluiceway was jackhammered out and
a second one installed at what was probably a lower level and
would be adequate to handle run -off. Such was not to be the
case! The new sluice -way was as ineffective as the first
one and remains as ineffective to this day!
Now is the time for thi problem to be re- addressed and corrected.
�
Thank .you,
Kenneth G. and Rosemary R. And n
March 19, 1999
Wayne Houle
City of Edina
4801 W 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Houle:
SUBJECT: HIGHLANDS PARK AREA PAVEMENT RECLAIMING PROJECT
........
We do NOT support the reclaiming project for Chantrey Road.- As I drive through the city,
there are many roads in Edina in worse shape than Chantrey. I have heard the argument "all
or none" and disagree with.your thinking. Chantrey Road does not need $150,000.00 of
repairs!
Sincerely,
5401 CHANTREY ROAD
EDINA, MN 55436
April 20, 1998
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
STREET RESURFACING
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT A -186
HIGHLANDS PARK NEIGHBORHOOD
y,
The Edina City Council will meet at the Edina City Hall on Monday, May 3, 1999 at 7:00 PM to hold a Public Hearing on
the street recycling, bituminous resurfacing on Dundee Road from Northwood Drive to Ayrshire Boulevard, Mirror Lakes
Drive from Interlachen Boulevard to Ayrshire Boulevard, Chantrey Road and Glengarry Parkway from Northwood Drive
to Ayrshire Boulevard, Doncaster Way from Highland Park Shelter to Vernon Avenue, and Merritt Circle. This hearing
is being conducted under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.
This hearing has been called as a recommendation from staff. The proposed project would be constructed in 1999 with
the assessment hearing occurring in late September or early October. This project includes assessing the Highland
Elementary School and Highland Park properties. The estimated project cost is $487,000. The cost of the project will
be funded by special assessment. The estimated cost per assessable lot is $2,500 and could be divided over a ten
year period with interest accumulating on the unpaid balance.
The area proposed to be assessed the cost of the proposed improvement includes:
Lots 1 thru 4, Blk 1 and Lots 4 & 5 Blk 2, John E. Anderson's Addition to Edina Highlands; Lots 1 thru 7, Blk 1, Lots 1
thru 15, Blk 2, Lots 1 thru 9, Blk 3, Lots 1 thru 8 and 9, Blk 4, Lot 1, Blk 5, Lots 1 thru 9, Blk 6, Lots 1 thru 3, Blk 7, Lots
1 thru 7, Blk 8, "Mirror Lakes in Edina" Addition; Lots 1 & 2, Blk 1, Lot 1, Blk 2, and Lots 1 & 2, Blk 3, "Mirror Lakes
Meadow -wood Addition to Edina Highlands "; Lots 1 thru 38, " Rosendahl's Edina Highlands" Addition; Lots 1 thru 31 Blk
1 and Lots 1 thru 5, Blk 2, Rosendahl's 2nd Addition to Edina Highlands; Lots 1 & 20, Blk 1, "Smilden's Addition to
Edina Highlands "; Lots 1 thru 12, Blk 1, Lots 1 thru 11, Blk 2, and Lots 1 thru 10, Blk 3, Victorsen's Addition to Edina
Highlands; Lot 1, Blk 1, Lot 1, Blk 2, Lot 1, Blk 3, "Yund's Addition to Edina Highlands "; Nly 188 ft of E 150 ft of W 380 ft
of NW % of SE % ex road, unplatted 29- 117 -21; Com at a pt in W line of Mirror Lakes Drive dis 188 ft S of N line of W
'/s of NW % of SE 1/4 th S par with said N line 150 ft th S par with W line of NW '/4 of SE 1/4 to Wly line of said Drive th
NEly along said road line to beg, unplatted 29- 117 -21; Com at NE cor of Blk 5 Mirror Lakes in Edina th S 182 31/100 ft
to the SE cor of said blk th Ely 125 ft along a curve to the left having a radius of 270 ft to a pt dis 209 9/10 ft SEly from
beg th NWly to beg also Blk 5 Mirror Lakes in Edina.
Your receipt of this notice is an indication that property whose ownership is listed to you is among those properties
which are considered to be benefited by the improvement.
Any inquiries, comments and /or suggestions you may have regarding this improvement may be forwarded to the City
Council or Engineering Department prior to the hearing or presented at the hearing itself. If you desire additional
information, please call Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. The City
Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close of the hearing.
Thank you,
Francis J. o an, P.E.
Director of Public Works and City Engineer
FJ H /clf
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 826 -0379
City staff initiated this project. The proposed project would involve reclaiming the
existing bituminous, and repaving the roadways.
Staff analyzed the project and feels that the project is feasible from an engineering
standpoint.
The Feasibility Study was submitted to Council on April 5. 1 have attached a copy of
this Feasibility Study along with Notice of Public Hearing to this report, and a resident
letter.
The estimated project cost is $30,300. Funding for this project would be from a special
assessment of approximately $2,200 per all assessable lots.
'w91NA11'�
°
�Cn
R PORURECOMM NDATION
- less
To: Mayor & City Council
Agenda Item #II.D.
From: Francis J. Hoffman_
Consent
.......... ......
....... ........ ....City- Engineer
_- Information. Only
El
Date: May 3, 1999
Mgr. Recommends
E] To HRA
® To Council'
Subject: Public Hearing: Rosemary
Action
® Motion
Lane Street Resurfacing
®Resolution
Improvement A -187
❑ Ordinance.
❑ Discussion
Recommendation:
If the Council determines the project to be warranted and necessary, Council shall
adopt a resolution approving Rosemary Lane Street Resurfacing Improvement A -187,
authorize plans and specifications to be completed and bids taken...
Info /Background:
City staff initiated this project. The proposed project would involve reclaiming the
existing bituminous, and repaving the roadways.
Staff analyzed the project and feels that the project is feasible from an engineering
standpoint.
The Feasibility Study was submitted to Council on April 5. 1 have attached a copy of
this Feasibility Study along with Notice of Public Hearing to this report, and a resident
letter.
The estimated project cost is $30,300. Funding for this project would be from a special
assessment of approximately $2,200 per all assessable lots.
r
k ,lL,� FEASIBILITY STUDY- A187
o @ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
ay CITY OF EDINA
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
ROSEMARY LANE
ARPIL 5, 1999
LOCATION: Rosemary Lane from Valley View Road to end of cul -de -sac.
p 882f�
8833
6701
O
Q.00 Gros
6201 6701
6713
8i 17
6
6721
6704
6708
6712
6718 .. }f 8701
r'
6720 6705
6724 6700
ROSEMAN
6725 6713 ..
N
6700
0 RECLAIMING AREA
LANE
6717
8732
r:{: 1 1 6772 6768 6764 6750
VALLEY VIEW ROAD
6P01 6763
666o g soot
W
a
INITIATION & ISSUES: This project was staff initiated by the Edina Engineering Department as part
of the neighborhood street reconstruction program. The street department
requested that this street be reconstructed due to the poor pavement
condition.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing roadway was constructed in 1964 and consist of a 28 foot wide
bituminous urban section. The pavement is in relatively poor condition and
is very brittle with major block cracking throughout. This roadway appears to
be at the end of its useful life; meaning overlaying or seal- coating this
pavement would not be feasible. Some sections of the existing concrete
curb and gutter have settled.
Page 1
Feasibility Study
Rosemary Lane
April 5, 1999
Page 2
Pavement condition on Rosemary Lane
IMPROVEMENT: This project involves reclaiming the existing bituminous, a process that grinds
up the existing roadway, regrading the roadway bed, removing any excess
material, and repaving the roadway with a two and one -half to three inch
bituminous pavement. A neighborhood informational packet was sent to
these homeowners and an open house is scheduled for April 6, any
information gathered from this open house will be presented with the Public
Hearing report.
Failed curb and gutter to be replaced.
Feasibility Study
Rosemary Lane
April 5, 1999
Page 3
RIGHT -OF -WAY: . Adequate right -of -way exists.
FEASIBILITY: This project is feasible from an engineering / city standpoint.
. EASEMENTS: No additional easements will be required.
COMPLETION:. 1999 Construction Season (June- August)
ASSESSMENTS: A special assessment of approximately $2,200 per assessable lot will be
levied against,the residents along Rosemary Lane.
PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated construction cost is $24,500. The estimated
construction cost does not include utility upgrades. Any utility upgrades will
.be funded through the respective utility fund. The estimated project cost is
$30,300, which includes indirect costs of 22.5 %, which includes engineering,
clerical, and finance costs. Funding for the entire project will be from a
combination of special assessment and utility funds. See attached summary
of the Project Cost Estimate.
PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint:
Council Orders Public Hearing .............. ..........................April 5, 1999
Receive Feasibility Report .................... ..........................April 5, 1999
Public Hearing .. ............................... ............................May 3, 1999
Bid Opening .............................. ............................... 0,
June 1 199
Award Contract .............................. ...........................June 15, 1999
Begin Construction ............................ ......................End -June, 1999
Complete Construction ........................ ........................August, 1999
ow SURVEY
a� CITY OF EDINA
The City of Edina's Public Works Staff has determined that your roadway is at a point where additional
surface treatments or straight asphalt overlays would not be cost effective. The Engineering staff is
proposing a full depth reclamation method for your street. This technique is approximately one -half the cost
of traditional reconstruction methods and causes considerably less disruption during construction. This
method involves grinding -up the existing roadway pavement then regrading and paving the street. This
project could be constructed during the summer of 1999, with the public hearing process being held this
winter. More information will follow regarding costs, public hearing schedules, etc.
The majority of the neighborhood does not have concrete curb and gutter. Installation of concrete curb and
gutter benefits the surface water drainage and the structural integrity of a roadway. The Engineering staff is
requesting your input regarding the installation of curb and gutters along your street. Please complete the
following survey and return it in the enclosed stamped envelope by November 6th. Please contact
Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 if you have any questions.
Which curb & gutter system, if any, do you prefer? Please check one box.
u
Bulkhead Curb and Gutter:
• Best control of surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Most expensive (potentially adds $800 to $1000 per assessable lot)
❑ Surmountable Curb and Gutter:
• Controls surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Lower cost (potentially adds $600 to $800 per assessable lot)
❑ No curb or gutter: Existing condition.
• Least control of surface water runoff
• No yard / roadway definition.
• Prone to reducing structural strength of edge of roadway.
OTHER COMMENTS:
Address:
March 30, 1999
Re: Resident Letter No. 1
Project Information & Open House Notice
.......- Rosemary -- Lane. - Roadway Improvements__
Dear Rosemary Lane Area. Residents:
The City of Edina has initiated the
Engineering Staff is hosting
Tuesday, April 6 from 5:00 to
westerly side of the Edina City
consist of an informal question
presentation will be given. If you
hesitate to call me at 826 -0443.
a
process for roadway improvements for you
n Open House regarding this project
6:00 PM at Edina City Council Chambers
„1. °> tai
r roadway. The
to be held on
located on the
Hall at 4801 West 50th Street. The open house format will
and answer session regarding the proposed project; no
have any questions and cannot attend this open house do not
This proposed project consists of reclaiming the roadway as shown on the attached Reclaiming
Process Sheet. The majority of the existing concrete curb and gutter will remain in place; any
failed sections will be replaced. Utilities such as sanitary sewer and water services will also be
analyzed for any repairs or replacement at this time. The construction for this project should
take approximately three to four weeks depending on the extent of work to be completed (utility
work generally will take longer than just repaving).
The proposed preliminary schedule is as follows:
Informational Meeting ..........................April 6, 1999
Public Hearing ....... ............................May 3, 1999
Begin Construction ........................June / July,1999
Complete Construction ...... August / September, 1999
Final Assessment Hearing .......... Fall of 1999 or 2000
Please keep in mind that this project is "proposed only” until the City Council orders it at a
Public Hearing. Also, you will be notified of the public hearing date at least ten days prior to the
public hearing.
The assessments for this project are preliminarily setup on a per lot basis, meaning all lots will
be assessed equally. Assessments are typically added to the tax roll after the final assessment
hearing and can be spread -out over 10 years. Proposed assessments for this project are
around $2,200 per lot and includes only the pavement reclaiming portion; any utility work will be
charged to the City Utility Fund.
One most frequently asked question is "Why does our street need to be rehabilitated ?"
Rosemary Lane was constructed in 1964. A bituminous (blacktop) roadway with normal
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 826 -0379
Page 2
Rosemary Lane
Resident Letter No. 1
March 30, 1999
maintenance will. typically last between 30 to 35 years. Rosemary at this signs of the
major cracking therefor it is not feasible to crackseal and seal co
pavement is not replaced at this time water will continue to infiltrate through the cracks into the
subgrade below the pavement and will cause major failure of
oad to roadway. If this occurs the cost
roadway will need to be totally reconstructed costing approximately
of reclaiming.
Another frequently asked -- question is "Why_ don't regular taxes cover a project such as this ? ":
Money for roadways from the City's General "Fund can only be spent on genera main enanc _.
City oadways such as cracksealing and sealcoating. Minnesota State Law only Rdermits cities y upgrade water and .sewer systems.
to establish Utility- Funds. to maintain and upg and
sidewalks are not yet included therefor improvements for these types of projects need to be
assessed.
It is to be hoped that this letter will answer most questions you might ease call me at have an
additional questions or input and can not make it to the open house p
Sincerely,
Wayne D. Houle, PE
Assistant City Engineer
Attachments
STREET RECLAIMING PROCESS
Often times a roadway may contain many patches and a lot of cracking, but may not be at a point of total
reconstruction. Street reclaiming is a process that can be applied to these roadways. Reclaiming as
shown below is a process where a grinding machine will grind up the existing roadway using all portions of
the existing roadway. The roadway is graded and compacted then repaved. Disturbances to driveways.,
yards and landscaping for areas that are not adding concrete curb and gutters is minimal and the City will
repair all disturbances that are associated with the project. Disturbances to driveways, yards and
landscaping for areas that are adding concrete curb and gutters will be affected depending on the layout of
the new curb and gutter; however the City will also repair any disturbances that are associated with the
project. Reclaiming is typically about 1/3 the cost of reconstructing the roadway.
Streets before the reclaiming process.
Reclaiming (grinding) Machine
New Pavement without curb and gutter. New pavement with curb and gutter.
SUMMARY OF COST ANALYSIS
ROSEMARY LANE
PAVEMENT RECLAIMING
CITY OF EDINA
Subtotal Construction Cost $ 22,300
10% Contingency $ 2,200
Total Construction Cost $ 24,500
15% Engineering & Clerical $ 3,700
Total Construction Cost $ 28,200
7.5% Finance $ 2,100
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 30,300
NOTE: Does not include any utility costs.
c•nnnpRnvivlR7iMiSCiOt1ANTITIES -A187 Cost Estimate -As Page 1 7:13 PM3/31/99
A4
Al �
e r
April 20, 1998
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
STREET RESURFACING
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT A -187
ROSEMARY LANE
1.....,'
The Edina City Council will meet at the Edina City Hall on Monday, May 3, 1999 at 7:00 PM to hold a Public
Hearing on the street recycling, bituminous resurfacing on Rosemary Lane. This hearing is being
conducted under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.
This hearing has been called as a recommendation from staff. The proposed project would be constructed
in 1999 with the assessment hearing occurring in late September or early October. The estimated project
cost is $30,300. The cost of the project will be funded by special assessment. The estimated cost per
assessable lot is $2,200 and could be divided over a ten year period with interest accumulating on the
unpaid balance.
The area proposed to be assessed the cost of the proposed improvement includes:
Lots 1 thru 9, Blk 1; and Lots 1 thru 4 and Outlot 1, Blk 2, Valley Vista Addition.
Your receipt of this notice is an indication that property whose ownership is listed to you is among those
properties which are considered to be benefited by the improvement.
Any inquiries, comments and /or suggestions you may have regarding this improvement may be forwarded
to the City Council or Engineering Department prior to the hearing or presented at the hearing itself. If you
desire additional information, please call Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM,
Monday through Friday. The City Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close
of the hearing.
Thank you,
Francis J. ff an, P.E.
Director of Public Works and City Engineer
FJH /clf
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 826 -0379
r�
4
O e �
•- ,N�RPOPA� '�/
1000
is
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis J. Hoffman
- City Engineer o r
Date: May 3, 1999
Subject: Public Hearing: Eden Prairie
Road Street Resurfacing
Improvement A -188
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # II. E.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
® To Council
Action ® Motion
® Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
If the Council determines the project to be warranted and necessary, Council shall
adopt a.resolution approving Eden Prairie Road Street Resurfacing Improvement A-
188, authorize plans and specifications to be completed and bids taken.
Info /Background:
City staff initiated this project. The proposed project would involve reclaiming the
existing bituminous,. and repaving the roadways.
Staff analyzed the project and feels that the project is feasible from an engineering
standpoint.
The Feasibility Study was submitted to Council on April 5. '1 have attached a copy of
this Feasibility Study along with Notice of Public Hearing to this report, and a resident
letter.
The_ estimated project cost is $46,000. Funding for this project would be from a special
assessment of approximately $900 per all assessable lots or condominium unit.
0
f
91N�r�� FEASIBILITY STUDY ® A188
o e �, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
�° CITY OF EDINA
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD .
APRIL 5, 1999
LOCATION: Eden Prairie Road from Blake Road to Kaymar Drive.
LUUE LA y
iw.. EFMEY
sEoft
0
0
Y
I1F�L�L�II GROW CIR
pP
N OROYE 9i
INITIATION & ISSUES: This project was staff initiated by the Edina Engineering Department as part
of the neighborhood street reconstruction program. The street department
requested that this street be reconstructed due to the poor pavement
condition.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing roadway was constructed in 1963 and consist of a 28 foot wide
bituminous rural section. Concrete curb and gutter along with other types of
curbs (timbers, bituminous, ect.) exist in front of some residents and both of
the condominium buildings at 6105 and 6005 Eden Prairie Road. The
pavement is in relatively poor condition with areas containing many types of
stress cracking along with many patches throughout. This roadway appears
to be at the end of its useful life; overlaying or sealcoating this pavement
would not be feasible.
Feasibility Study
Eden Prairie Road
April 5, 1999
Page 2
Pavement condition on Eden Prairie Road
IMPROVEMENT: This project involves reclaiming the existing bituminous, a process that grinds
up the existing roadway, regrades the road bed, excess material from the
roadway will be removed and the roadway will be repaved with a two and
one -half to three inch bituminous pavement. The portion of Eden Prairie
Road adjacent to 6016 Vernon Avenue will be removed, the pathway will be
extended, and the remaining area resodded. A neighborhood survey was
sent out last fall to all residents who do not have existing curb and gutters
asking for their opinion of installing concrete curb and gutter, see attached
copy of survey. The majority of the neighbors responding, 4 out of 6, were in
favor of installing concrete curb and gutter throughout. A second survey was
sent at the request of residents attending the informational meeting to these
same residents verifying the first survey. The majority of the neighbors
responding, 11 out of 17, do not prefer to have concrete curb and gutters
installed at this time. The second survey also asked if the residents were in
favor or not in favor of the project; the majority of the residents responding,
19 out of 36, are not in favor of the project. Due to the condition of the
roadway staff is still recommending this project.
Fbasibility Study
Eden Prairie Road
April 5, 1999
Page 3
RIGHT -OF -WAY:
FEASIBILITY:
EASEMENTS:
COMPLETION:
Existing curb & gutter at 6105 Eden Prairie Road
Adequate right -of -way exists.
This project is feasible from an engineering / city standpoint.
No additional easements will be required.
1999 Construction Season (June- August)
ASSESSMENTS: A special assessment of approximately $900 per assessable lot or unit
will be levied against the residents along Eden Prairie Road. Any residents
or owners that abut Eden Prairie Road with their side or back property lines
will be assessed one -third of front foot cost.
PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated construction cost is $37,000. The estimated
construction cost does not include storm sewer upgrades. Any storm sewer
upgrades will be funded through the stormwater utility fund. The estimated
project cost is $46,000, which includes indirect costs of 22.5 %, which
includes engineering, clerical, and finance costs. Funding for the entire
project will be from a combination of special assessment and stormwater
utility. See attached summary of the Project Cost Estimate.
PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint:
Council Orders Public Hearing .............. ..........................April 5, 1999
Receive Feasibility Report ..................... ..........................April 5,1999
Public Hearing .. ............................... ............................May 3, 1999
BidOpening ... ............................... ...........................June 10, 1999
Award Contract .............................. ...........................June 15, 1999
Begin Construction ............................... ..................End- June,1999
Complete. Construction ...................... .....................September, 1999
g
H''o �o
SURVEY
CITY OF EDINA
The City of Edina's Public Works. Staff has determined that your roadway is at a point where additional
surface treatments or straight asphalt overlays would not be .cost effective. The Engineering staff is
proposing a full depth reclamation method for your street. This technique is approximately one -half the cost
of traditional reconstruction methods and causes considerably less disruption during construction. This
method involves grinding -up the existing roadway pavement then regrading and paving the street. This
project could be constructed during the 'summer of 1999, with the public hearing process being held this
winter. More information will follow regarding costs, public hearing schedules, etc.
The majority of the neighborhood does not have.concrete curb and gutter. Installation of concrete curb and
......... gutter benefits.the_surface water drainage.,and.. the structural. integrity of.a. roadway. The Engineering_ staff, is.__
requesting your input regarding the installation of curb and gutters along your street. Please complete the
following survey and return it in the enclosed stamped envelope by November 6th. Please contact
Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 if you have any questions.
Which curb & gutter system, if any, do you prefer? Please check one box.
[NI
Bulkhead Curb and Gutter:'
• Best control of surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Most expensive (potentially adds $800 to $1000 per assessable lot)
❑ Surmountable Curb and Gutter:
® Controls surface water runoff
® Defines yard / roadway.
® Lower cost (potentially adds $600 to $800 per assessable lot)
❑ No curb or gutter: Existing condition.
■ Least control of surface water runoff
® No yard / roadway definition.
® Prone to reducing structural strength of edge of roadway.
OTHER COMMENTS:
Address:
i
City of tj'din.a
February 23, 1999
Eden Prairie Road Area Residents
Edina, MN
Re: Resident Letter No. 1
Informational Meeting Announcement
Eden Prairie Road Roadway Improvements
City of Edina
Dear Resident:
As many of you know the City of Edina has initiated the process for roadway improvements for
your neighborhood. The City of Edina is hosting an Informational Meeting regarding this
project to be held on Tuesday, March 16 at Arneson Acres Park, lower level meeting
room, at 8:00 PM. Arneson Acres is located at 4711 West 70th Street, two .blocks east of Hwy
100.
The meeting format will consist of a short presentation followed by an informal question and
answer session. The presentation will cover scope of work and average assessment costs. If
you cannot attend this meeting please contact me at 826 -0443 and I will answer any questions
you may have.
Sincerely,
Wayne D. Houle, PE
Assistant City Engineer
c: File
City Hall
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394
(612) 927 -8861
FAX (612) 826 -0390
TDD (612) 826 -0379
March 4, 1999
C., l
Re: Resident Letter No. 2
Project Information
Eden Prairie Roadway Improvements
Dear Eden Prairie Road Area Residents:
Due to the interest in this project I am sending out this informational letter describing the proposed
project, the potential schedule, and potential assessments.
This proposed project will consist of reclaiming the roadway as shown on the attached Reclaiming
Process Sheet. The results of the fall survey indicated a desire for concrete curb and gutters where they
currently do not exist. Engineering staff will look at any surface drainage problems that might exist and
ways to help alleviate these problems. The construction for this project should take approximately three
to eight weeks depending on the extent of work to be completed (utility work generally will take longer
than just repaving).
The proposed preliminary schedule is as follows:
Informational Meeting...... March 16, 1999 Complete Construction ..... August / September, 1999
Public Hearing ............ End of April; 1999 Final Assessment Hearing ......... Fall of 1999 or 2000
Begin Construction ..... ... June / July, 1999
Please keep in mind that this project is "proposed only" until the City.Council orders or dismisses it at a
Public Hearing. Also, you will be notified of the public hearing date at least ten days prior to the public
hearing.
The assessments for this proposed project are preliminarily setup on a per unit or lot basis, meaning all
units and lots will be assessed equally. Any lots that are adjacent to, but do not front the proposed
reclaimed roadway will be assessed at one -third the cost. Assessments are typically added to the tax roll
after the final assessment hearing and can be spread out over 10 years. Proposed Assessments for this
project are +$1,400 per unit / lot and includes the pavement reclaiming portion and all concrete curb and
gutter. Any utility work will be charged to the City Utility Fund.
It is to be hoped that this letter will answer most questions you might have. This information will be
reiterated at the informational meeting, if you have any additional questions or' input and can not make it
to this meeting please call me at 826 -0443.
Sincerely,
Wayne D. Houle, PE
Assistant City Engineer
City Hall (612) 927 -8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
STREET RECLAIMING PROCESS
Often times a roadway may contain many patches and a lot of cracking, but may not be at a point of total
reconstruction. Street reclaiming is a process that can be applied to these roadways. Reclaiming as
shown below is a process where a grinding machine will grind up the existing roadway using all portions of
the existing roadway. The roadway is graded and compacted then repaved. Disturbances to driveways,
yards and landscaping for areas that are not adding concrete curb and gutters is minimal and the City will
repair all disturbances that are associated with the project. Disturbances to driveways, yards and
landscaping for areas that are adding concrete curb and gutters will be affected depending on the layout of
the new curb and gutter; however the City will also repair any disturbances that are associated with the
project. Reclaiming is typically about 1/3 the cost of reconstructing the roadway.
Streets before the reclaiming process.
Reclaiming (arindina) Machine
New Pavement without curb and autter.
New pavement with curb and autter.
A.
0 e RE- SURVEY
CD
EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD
PAVEMENT RECLAIMING PROJECT
CITY OF EDINA
As many of you know the Edina Engineering Staff conducted a neighborhood informational
meeting on March 16. Over half of the attending residents requested that the neighborhood be
resurveyed for installation of curb and gutters. I've attached a postcard survey regarding this
issue. Please return this survey as soon as possible but no later than March 25. Also, please
include your house number for recording these results.
I've also reattached information on the different types of concrete curb and gutters. The results of
this survey will be included with the notice for Public Hearing.
Please contact Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 if you have any questions.
Bulkhead Curb and Gutter:
• Best control of surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Most expensive (potentially adds $800 to $1100 per assessable lot)
Surmountable Curb and Gutter:
• Controls surface water runoff
• Defines yard / roadway.
• Lower cost (potentially adds $600 to $800 per assessable lot)
SUMMARY OF COST ANALYSIS
EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD PAVEMENT RECLAIMING
CITY OF EDINA
Subtotal Construction Cost $ 34,000
10% Contingency $ 3,000
Total Construction Cost $ 37,000
56 i - - ' 6 000
/0. rical $ 9
Total Construction Cost $ 43,000
7.5% Finance $ 3,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 46,000
NOTE: Does not include any utility costs.
GAMPROWAl 85/MISC/QUANTITIES - A188 Cost Estimate Page 1 2:00 PIV14/1/99
� . _�,J
April 20, 1998
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
STREET RESURFACING
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT A -188
__ .... _ ....
EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD
The Edina City Council will meet at the Edina City Hall on Monday, May 3, 1999 at 7:00 PM to hold .a Public
Hearing on the street recycling, bituminous resurfacing on Eden Prairie Road. This hearing is being
conducted under the authority granted by Minnesota. Statutes, Chapter 429.
This hearing has been called as a recommendation from staff. The proposed project would be constructed
in 1999 with the assessment hearing occurring in late September or early October. The estimated project
cost is $46,000. The cost of the project will be funded by special assessment. The estimated cost per
assessable lot or unit is $900 and could be divided over a ten year period with interest accumulating on the
unpaid balance.
the, cost of the proposed improvement includes:
The area proposed to be assessed p p P
Lots 8 thru 13, Blk 2, "Valley Park" Addition; Lots 4 thru 7, Blk 1, Jones' Knolls Addition; Lot 2, Blk 1,
Willards Knoll, AKA Parkwood View Condo Apartment Ownership No. 189, Apts. 101 thru 110, 201 -210;
- --
Apartment Ownership No. 0076, Whitehall, A Condominium, Apts. 11 thru 17, 21 27, 31 -37; Apartment
Ownership No. 0190, Apts. 101 -110, 201 -210; RLS 1081 and RLS 0194.
Your receipt of this notice is an indication that property whose ownership is listed to you is among those
properties which are considered to be benefited by the improvement.
Any inquiries, comments and /or suggestions you may have regarding this improvement may be forwarded
to the City Council or Engineering Department prior to the hearing or presented at the hearing itself. If you
desire additional information, please call Wayne Houle at 826 -0443 between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM,
Monday through Friday. The City Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close
of the hearing.
Thank you,
Francis J. H man, P.E.
Director of Public Works & City Engineer
FJ H /clf
City Hall (612),927-8861
4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 826 -0390
FfIIAIA AAINNFCr)TA rIAIA -120d Tnn !hl )l A ?(, -017Q
'e
LOCATION
Consent III. A.
MAP
LOT DIVISION
NUMBER LD -99 -1
LOCATION 4404 West 42nd Street
4406 West 42nd Street
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
I
DRAFT MINUTES PC MEETING APRIL 28, 1999
LD -99 -1 Frederick and Robyn Green
4404 West 42nd Street
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the proposed lot division will facilitate a five
foot addition to the garage at 4404 West 42nd Street. The Zoning Board of Appeals
granted a variance for the addition subject to this land trade. The home at 4406 West 42nd
Street will comply with setback requirements following the trade.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends approval.
Commissioner McClelland moved to recommend lot division approval.
Commissioner Ingwalson seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
T
EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 28, 1999
STAFF REPORT
LD -99 -1 Frederick and Robyn Green
4404 West 42nd Street
The proposed lot division will facilitate a five foot addition to the garage at 4404
West 42nd Street. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance for the addition
subject to this land trade. The home at 4406 West 42 "d Street will comply with setback
requirements following the trade.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval.
K
N 89'09'04" E _
N 89'09'04" E _ -- 85.36 -- - - -
-- 65.35 --
Ott'91 EA,STLRLY
N IL STLRLY
PARCEL
PARCEL I w ,
- — — — I ',MINIMUM BUILDING ry J
he MINIMUM BUILDING - , o F SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINE pZ+ /= f1' /B� SQ. �'`•
A4= B,50.Y SQ. FT. o , i I o
N891 4'31 "E 17.2 - PROPOSED 5' ADDITION
4.00 ` < -- , w
``` ' .17.7 I Lo
THE NORTH LINE OF THE - - - -
3 SOUTH 73 FEET OF LOT 5 24 "OA - Ci p
I THE WEST LINE OF THE /14.9 / / //.20.6/ N
N EAST 4 FEET OF LOT 5
N I
M C 7.2 EXISTING i Z
O I - DWELLING
X4404 - 7.0'
' I Z EXISTING 1 .1' /.10.0
�• I.� DWELLING � f►
X4.9
24 -0 K i .0 2.2 6; 4.7/ - 6.r11-
\ 6 "PIE P o \/ GRAPHIC SCALE
w
1 I r✓ W 0 10 70
I N 24'OAK n ' J ( IN FEET )
•J I I 1 inch = 20 tl
PROPOSED
\ I
4' DIVISION
24 "OAK \ J
89.00 —__
-- 6T.09 - -- N 89-14'31" E
N 89'1431" E
I am 57)7?EEr
Ita. 4k?WYVP
DRAFT MINUTES ZONING BOARD APRIL 15, 1999
B -99 -14 Frederick T. and Robyn Y. Green
4404 West 42nd Street
Lot 6, & West 10' of Lot 7 William Scott's Addition
Zoning: . R -1
Request: A 1.3 foot sideyard setback variance for a garage addition
and a 6.3' sideyard setback variance for living space above
the garage
Ms. Aaker informed the Board the subject property is located on the north side of
West 42 "d Street consisting of a 1 '/ story home with an attached one car garage. The
homeowner is hoping to acquire a portion of their neighbors property to allow for
expansion of the existing garage to provide for the storage of two cars. The land
acquisition does not eliminate the need for variances for setback of garage and living
space.
Ms. Aaker explained the homeowners are proposing to add 5 feet to their existing
15 foot wide garage resulting in a 20 foot wide garage. To accomplish the addition, the
homeowners have been working with the immediate neighbors to purchase a 4 foot by 75
foot strip of land. The addition will accommodate a narrow two car garage, however, will
require two variances. The interior sideyard setback requirement for a garage is 5 feet
and 10 feet for living space. The interior sideyard setback of the existing garage is
currently 4.7 feet, the setback will be changed to 3.7 feet. The living space over the
garage is required to be 10 feet, it currently is at 4.7 feet and will be changed to 3.7 feet.
Ms. Aaker pointed out the neighbors setback from the new side lot line will be 8.2
feet which- is greater than their minimum required setback.
Ms. Aaker asked the Board to note generally, the Zoning Board of Appeals has
been supportive of sideyard variances to allow a single car garage to be expanded to a
two car garage as required by Ordinance. The Board has reviewed and approved
requests up to three feet to the side lot line. The subject request is a little bit different than
other requests because a lot line is being rearranged to accommodate the expansion.
Ms. Aaker concluded in general, the Zoning Board has tried to accommodate the
expansion of single car garages to two car garages. Any approval of the submitted
variance must be conditioned upon the approval of the lot split by the Planning
Commission and City Council.
The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Green were present.
Mr. Lewis asked the proponents if they have a Purchase Agreement with the
adjoining neighbor. Mr. Green responded in the affirmative.
Mrs. Bergman asked Mr. Green why the proposed lot division line does not go
straight back. Mr. Green said the adjoining neighbor wants to retain as much rearyard
area as possible while accommodating our desire for a two car garage.
Mr. Byron inquired on the depth of the lot. Mr. Green responded the lot is 120 feet
deep.
Mr. Lewis moved variance approval subject to the plans presented, the use of
matching materials, and contingent on lot division approval from the Planning Commission
and City Council. Mrs. Bergman seconded the motion. All voted aye.
�i
I
o e VA
En
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Craig Larsen
City Planner
Date: May 3, 1999
Subject: S -99 -2, Final Plat Approval.
Haugland Ist Addition.
Haugland Company.
Recommendation:
Final Plat Approval subject to:
Agenda Item: III. B.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
®
To Council
Action ❑
Motion
®
Resolution
.❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
1. Subdivision Dedication based on an unimproved land value of $981,000.
2. Landscaping Bond
3. Executed and Recorded Proof of Parking Agreement
4. Watershed District Permits
Info /Background:
The City Council granted Preliminary Plat approval and Final Development Plan
approval on April 19, 1999. The proponents now are presenting a Final Plat for
approval.
HAU GLAND
I u�
I
••IOr1..O .[N1 /.d
11. 01 K.a
Re36.00
I Aa7 *37' 52":......
I (�
• y /
C)
( li •- a /
1
� b /
N If
- _ a7K /
FIRST ADDITION
?RlMIE PROFE551CC.AL CENTER /
I $1.1. .0 Ub w--l. . •~M M 10••.1.1 Kpbr K•Mtt .tt..10 «,M C«n10 M Ilwlep «.••
to NL•
wN 1:
I O.VN 0. M..•. r.r. 2M &,Mk A -or#" U M -&# aN N-rf W r1..t.
N Ilwny« C.wlp, Y«.K.1.
1v.r E
l..t w N IN ...1 lf7 ...1 N M V. 7b 104 n W .1 S Mangy N. r1.rN 11
11 rwl 61.. N M YprN.nl Ou•rl.r N w Swu.Kl Ow1� N S. Ill I.wwY 117,
�.I J 1 I =(1 - -` = R = . = I - - - - - - • «p. 71 wW 9r la.Ne.l.r17 N IM Mo. 2 MerOM INe f weM a N•
b1Nw1 ev.r N Outlsl D. 1«..sr IGN. 70N 4lNkn: 1Nnn rspr.1.r17 o M
1 ^.. n .E ...I. M N nN OuWI 0 11 •.N rolb 7!0 w I s.«p w
l I C V V RI . L KtYA ..NI .I b.f•1• N..K M1. .Kl.rll K 91 twl.t. II N rY .Nlwp 1M S
N8916.57 -E 18/.12 p It N.w. M>Nr.lo11 Iwfwl 1. 1.Y e... IflJf Mb w... rr14...1.n7 loot Io
'•t -•••. : •••• Q, �/ � �dw! • IwgwlN ve ewmr 1. M raN.rl bwl.. • rrYO N 11..17 IN M
• B �7� • bA a�1�y1• N 1 0.7- !. wNUtn !7 --* "-* 3".==ny. !1011 WI Oerq
• �� - - �� \ ( B• T/ • r.wK tOK.r b w l.01..Kt 11.1..E • r•A1. N 71.00 1rt 1. M lKI.Ir M
•01.11 Kr«rtt r0 aon tAl[r.1 KY 0.0 767 1r1 W t110r• I.wIMtNf, •eASS1p to w U10r SINK C.w1ee1I
si F Srr/ MW W rlwl. « 11«nrYl C::t YN1w.la
.1.::..,•.ao \ /! ?' IIK eerW M •«w0 b N vrl•. W •Mir K NAOl1ArD.all ADbilal W .sK
I. mr r
(J \ I M!l bet• W 00. w b M FAVIt M NMe w b.r M .wowwb K N.o w
(,`• as y ri.... W NOII Kr•KK
\ I N Nb10• ob wo W M.K..1.... cw.bYtll.. c.11M1. • YN.r.t. Goad. 4K
A ` ` tNw.r w.. pr..o1U 1• N .I- V by 1U KN Nke Nr - M/ N
IA0.f000 KNOLLS CONSINA110N Co1lrArr
T f I'
'•.o1n W N M .01.. 1e n, o K /, O M to s ■t. a SF
K r.
J I C) l IR 01�Yn.TSD1A
•( I w b.p..1. N.be.w1 .K .&- ft•f.d b.b.... tl11. Kr .1
Ip
� b ft ✓ Pon-" X....
1 I l l-lu C« 11 . YY.w.I. cepaby w b.b/1 N M myY•Ib.
8 L1,
I 1 Mra� e..u1l INI 1 Nw 00001.e W pMl.. M fr..olr ...>�.. w 141. r.l
(= I E) r.uafrlp .tltl1 . 1"; w1 1111. •41 I. • e-KI n _Iollw N W ..r1, 1N1 a
glow« �..wsY flew w M N.l r Ir1 W 11wbrU• N . 101: 0.1 a wa.ewwl.
f � •E Ne b.w rAnKVI « .1•R Mt N. wlaA. le.. r... e..cmu
E) 011 I wNY �101'KM to 1 N�� W IwOo n r1ie. N Y.w.K1• !1•WIr SWO�
(J I iLOOdd. �1
JNa YYnt.. . lw s
.0. Irn A. gi
fl
I COLOR d Y.11Emn
- I.Itlr Or
14. I b do, N
1N- p
ad 111. li. lvrp. Yi.ww1. Ile.nr N. 707p .
4q m
A ♦ y % y I + I ., %L ' `�- faw14 YNwr.1•
it
14r 041 of oIm t . goo. AMTKIN .n .IN..r o ..tKlr .0 w CN0 C.wwl N
n [E.1. YN.r10 •t • r.pts 1w..l.y I.oKI Mt NY .. N
_ 0 Ike w01w boo,..11.r cCAV
lrwrerl.ldl WIN cbwtp NWN�j L.-1 l Ne w s rK.lr..t w [JI0 .r w
.rrprOr ]0 . t ......W a1A01 UL N rd sw.wl. W rKOwwo bld.
S' • S N n Nr1..0 b0 YN.KS1• fINNO. lKllw !61.01 «Y 1
C I Y On DaLftM 01 WoIA. Y..(SCIA
I O $ I • I fi'
by WP by 0.1b
S /
O
-•
TAWAVDI Y.YISS 01w9d
Non««
If
I
()
I .(
Can14 YM001.
1 Mlbl eNlp WI 10•r p.�l. «�w1 prb ps. Mr..r. p.Y b 1W .rv4r
1ff�
h hp /
4
I
()
1010 K Ov-. 11««.0« t-Il A.M. by Owl!
I
I
St1«(r Sic110M .
(J
•-
01-1 =281-we
0«1«11 10
wl7w
• h /
I
--
SIAT.
. S1AT. S.. 7610.!/! 1101), tl14 1101 bK b.w w•.•. IbY __ M N
Q �' /
'
I
-�
I •(
1. 11.1.1a
-•
ci/ C•..r. cant/ s.K,. by
1
U
I
I
counr.ECO.xr
Nn.I. Cn14 w-
rn N food «
0(
N4 tMI
Nu M. d In- n
.1
L
? 1
I
!
K
-
YrA•i K 0-00. C-Al R-4o, by 0-tr
f.
f 1
1.•f n. ar1.a .o um« uwul
_
1
_ _ - - - - J
',
-
BEAR
BEARINGS sN011N ARE ASSUMED
r tn.oso.K ►.,: L _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ 1 - - - - - - - - - _ _ _
43 E) -•
,(
587'51'16 -W 506.51
.................:
•.. •-
. OENOTES 1/2 INCN By t4 wd1 IRON YONUYENt
SET AND MARKED NO.
�-
•�. ..............
`1 lc,:) O
BY LICENSE 20201
1.1
�i i i. i. -1 \
I •C 0
. DENOTES FOUND WON YONWENT.
T E R •.:•
li "
� -'; 'Q >_ - EGAN FIELD a NOWAK INC.
•
1 1'
S•,,,< a /T:1 SURVEYORS
r
Subdivision No :� — C(
SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: Planning Department
Subdivision Name:
Land Size: �G �� 5 Land
(By:
The developer of this subdivision has been required to
A. Grant an easement over part of the land
B. Dedicate % of the land
Date: )
C. Donate $ as a fee in lieu of land
As a result of applying the following policy:
A. Land. required (no density or intensity may be used for the first 5% of land
dedicated)
1. If property is adjacent to an existing park or playground and the
addition beneficially expands the park or playground.,
2. If property is six acres or will be combined with future dedications so
that the end result will be a minimum of a six acre park.
3. If property abuts a natural lake, pond, or stream or wetland then
protected by state or federal law.
4. If property is necessary for storm water holding or will be dredged or
otherwise improved for storm water holding areas or ponds.
5. If the property is a place of significant natural, scenic or historic value.
B.. Cash Required
1. In all other instances than above.
o e
Cn
.�y
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
TO: Mayor & City Council
From: Craig Larsen
City Planner
Date: May 3, 1999
Subject: S -99 -1, Final Plat Approval.
Northview Ist Addition.
Northview Devel. Co. Corp.
Recommendation:
Final Plat Approval subject to:
Agenda Item: Ill. C.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
®
To Council
Action
❑
Motion
®
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
1. Dedication of Outlots A and B to the City.
2. City Engineering approval of driveway locations and related fill.
Info /Background:
The City Council granted Preliminary Plat approval on February 16, 199,9,
subject to a number of conditions. The main concern was the size and location of the
proposed cul -de -sac. The revised plans illustrate a cul -de -sac which is moved north to
avoid wetland disturbance, and the diameter of the cul -de -sac is reduced from 70 to 60
feet. As a result of this change, the hard surface area is moved 20 feet further north.
See attached Final Plat, Preliminary Plat, Council minutes, Watershed District
Permit and conceptual development plan for the two lots.
I
LOCATION MAP
1. 1-
X-1-a-VE
\111'
DRIVE
kJVE FOUNTAINWOOD
RD CT
APTS.
. ......... . ....... .
$TAU
NMI
-HA PEL MILL
41 ION AL
t
SUBDIVISION
NUMBER S-99-1
L 0 C A T 10 N West of Londonderry Drive Extended
REQUEST Three Lot Single Dwelling Unit Subdivision
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NORTHVIEW 1ST ADDITION
N 89.54'lr • 540.09
—
.. � � � b I — 6viap. aM rNry w.rrnwf 1
0\ v b
r��� B L O C K IgI k" 1
y q I e 2 r' 8
tide• fir• '� 1 : 7I
y. 9
• `l �J i�4 Jt f� .17,
e .100�
� � �oirrage m0 utrFfy sasemenf I _ �. �� � 4 -
�' M es�.' 17• M
R If �,':y LONDONDERRY,,
f•' ; — s 89.54•lz• a 142." ~Q�J °j' DRIVE
F 8 OUTLOT EX. ; z9���' �'•
rro•1r . o� 8
�f gSWE7L AND �' = M y
.�o b
&G.MP f/d offlf)r om -"pw�
N 89'54.ir • 180.00
C�-
`v,
a. c
J
2
Q
3
W-ta FRET -
50 0 50 100
O DENOTES PON YOMACHT
Con.Wtlnq Enpin.�r• - .
� r
preliminary plat
,r*E L^ 6
S =c
9tldE: �� 70' W
WO
2,
_p
VD
Z(
Wi
Minutes/Edina City Council/February 16,1999
such easement area or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, re ace, remove or
otherwise attend thereto;
NOW, THEREFORE, E IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the C' of Edina, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, tha a following portion of West 418' Street is reby vacated retaining a
sanitary sewer and draina easement effective as of February 16, 9:
The northerly thirty ( feet of the unimproved portio of West 41st Street as .
platted in Morningside aks, South of Lot 9, B 1 2, Morningside Oaks,
according to the plat thereo n file or of record in a office of the Registrar of
Titles, Hennepin. County, Min sota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that sai vacation do not affect, and there are continued,
reserved, and retained, by the said resolu ' n ord ing the vacation, the following existing
easements and authority in, on and under the o vacated area:
City of Edina Sanitary Sewer and Dr ' e Easements and the authority of
Northern States Power Company, U es ommunications, Paragon Cable
Minnesota, or Minnegasco to en upon t above vacated area for the
maintenance, replacement, repair d removal of a d for otherwise attending to,
underground conduit, manhol , cables, wires an oles required for utility
service now in, on or under t above vacated area.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, th the City Clerk is authorized d directed to cause a notice
of completion of proceedings be prepared, entered in the tra fer record of the County
Auditor, and filed with the unty Recorder, in accordance with M nesota Statutes, Section
412.851. Member Kelly seco ded the motion.
Roll Call:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Resolution adopted.
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED, NORTHVIEW 1ST ADDITION, NORTHVIEW
v �U DEVELOPMENT COMPANY CORPORATION, GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF
�\q LONDONDERRY DRIVE EXTENDED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and
ordered placed on file.
Presentation by Planner
Planner Larsen noted the subject parcel is comprised of two vacant lots that were originally
platted with the office building development westerly across Nine Mile Creek in the mid 1960's.
The total area within the two parcels is 81,287 square feet. The subject property is adjacent to
Nine Mile Creek and significantly impacted by wetlands and floodplain. Watershed district rules
allow for a maximum twenty per cent fill of any flood plain area within the property. The
original proposal received by the City, depicted a three lot subdivision that would also have
resulted in a neck lot. The size of the proposed cul de sac aggravated the impact. However,
before the planning commission met to review the plat, the proponent withdrew the three lot
subdivision and submitted a two lot proposal.
Planner Larsen stated the revised proposed plat does not require any width variances. It also
significantly lessened the impact on the wetlands, reduced the amount of floodplain fill required,
and reduced the cul de sac from 42 feet to 35 feet in diameter. Planner Larsen concluded that the
Planning Commission recommended Council consider approving the preliminary plat with five
conditions: no wetlands disturbance, staff approval of driveway location to limit amount of fill in
floodplain, developers agreement, dedication to City of lands outside of proposed lots, and
vacation of unused right -of -way.
Page 2
Minutes/Edina City Council/February 16,1999
After the Planning Commission meeting, a letter from Russell F. Nelson representing the
Londonderry Drive neighbors was received: requesting the cul de sac be realigned further west
and centered in the natural open area, requesting that a triangular piece of land be given to
Nelson's Lot 1, that the drainage be channeled westerly, and that all vegetation lost during
construction be restored.
Planner Larsen explained that both the Planning and Engineering staff have reviewed the
resubmitted plat and the neighbors' modifications. He noted that .moving the street westerly
would likely impact the wetlands. In addition, moving the cul de sac north will reduce Lot 2's
depth and area. Reducing the lot's depth would cause it to need a variance. In staff's opinion the
resulting variance could be justified. by the increased protection it affords the vacant lot.
Concluding, Planner Larsen said staff recommended preliminary approval of the two -lot plat
with the cul de sac relocated. The cul de sac's exact location to be approved by the City Engineer.
However, staff does not support the transfer of any land to private ownership. All lands apart
from the proposed lots should be owned by the City.
Member Maetzold asked why the proposed plat's street was a cul de sac. Planner Larsen
explained the street was a cul de sac because it: will serve more than one parcel; allows the
subdivision to meet the City's code requirements relative to proper frontage for each lot; and
provides needed turning radius for Public Safety and Public Works equipment.
Member Faust asked how close houses may be built to bodies of water under Edina's current .
regulations. Planner Larsen replied that a 50 foot setback is required.
Member Hovland stated he ,understands the City's goal that subdivisions do not negatively
impact surrounding lots. He expressed concern regarding water run off and preservation of
wetlands. Member Hovland asked the legal consequences if the subdivision were denied leaving
one lot on the subject property. Planner Larsen stated that the proponents original plan would
require the maximum fill allowed by the watershed district to build homes. He added denying
the revised subdivision would be difficult because the lots meet the City's zoning ordinance
standards for two lots, and he believed would also comply with the watershed districts
standards.
Proponent Presentation
Jeffrey Gustafson, Northview Development Corporation, informed the Council the proposed
subdivision was difficult to design. He worked with- staff and the neighbors attempting to
design something everyone could accept. Mr. Gustafson said that in doing so, he had looked at a
variety of options, such as villa homes or town homes; but finally decided that detached single
family was best. He stated that he would commit to building a rambler walk out as depicted by a
photo he showed the Council. Mr. Gustafson added that moving the cul de sac north would
create an issue for him because of the resulting driveway grade and the additional floodplain it
would require. Mr. Gustafson showed the Council photographs of the existing woods that would
remain if he were allowed to use his original design.
Public Comment
Russell R. and Kathleen Nelson, 6625 Londonderry Drive, presented a letter signed by property
owners at the following Londonderry Drive addresses: 6625, 6623, 6624, 6608, 6612, 6604 and
6600; expressing the neighbors' concerns over the potential impact of the proposed development.
Page 3
Minutes/Edina City Council/February 16,1999
Mr. Nelson pointed out that there is an existing berm on the property, that there will be a large
amount of trees cut and he questioned where the drainage will flow. He added.the first time he
heard of the proposed subdivision was when the notice was received before the Planning
Commission's meeting. Mrs. Nelson expressed her concern over the removal of trees and the
potential ground instability. The Nelsons acknowledged that some development was inevitable,
but urged the Council to require the proponent to incorporate their previously stated
modifications before granting approval.
David Russell, 6623 Londonderry Drive, stated the creek is only about 20 feet from his home and
he is concerned about the integrity of the creek banks when the new homes are built increasing
water run off.
John Bussjajer, 6709 Parkwood Lane, stated _he lives north of the proposed development and
currently has no problems with drainage. water. He expressed concern with where water will
drain from the lots of the proposed subdivision when new homes are built.
Council Discussion/ Action
Mayor Smith stated that the proposed subdivision needs to be carefully reviewed to mitigate any
potential drainage issues. He questioned staff whether Barr Engineering should work with the .
proponent's engineers. Planner Larsen responded explaining that between the preliminary and
final plat approvals the watershed will review the subdivision and grant necessary approvals or
deny as appropriate. Engineer Hoffman added that if the Council desires, Edina could require
more engineering be completed before granting preliminary approvals.
Member Kelly asked if the preliminary approval be. granted reserving the right to change the cul
de sac before final approval. Planner Larsen replied this could happen.
Member Faust asked what the proponent's proposed subdivision's proximity was to the creek.
Planner Larsen answered the creek would be 60 -65 feet from the subdivision. Member Faust
asked which cul de sac staff thought best. Planner Larsen replied this was a practical problem,
the normal street grade is seven per cent and in the proposed subdivision the grade would be
approximately 11.5 per cent. He stated that if the cul de sac were moved slightly north it could
be acceptable.
Member Maetzold asked what the outside limits for driveway slope percent when City streets
are 7 -7.5 percent, and whether or not the diameter of the cul de sac could be smaller. Planner
Larsen replied that Edina does not have a maximum, for example Indian Hills has quite steep
slopes to their driveways. Engineer Hoffman stated that the Public Safety personnel like cul de
sac to be larger so equipment can move through efficiently, i.e. snowplowing, fire trucks.
Member Hovland asked - if conditions could be added to the approval since this was a
preliminary not a final plat. Specifically Member Hovland would require the cul de sac location
not be allowed to compromise wetland as approved by the City Engineer.
Jeff Gustafson interjected his concern in relocating the cul de sac because of the potential for
disturbing trees he intended to save and the resulting steep grade of the driveways. Mr.
Gustafson said he wants to know where the homes will be placed.
Page 4
Minutes/Edina City Councillebruary 16,1999
Engineer Hoffman asked that Council indicate whether or not a setback variance would be
acceptable if the modified subdivision were granted preliminary approval. He added that
engineering can be completed to satisfy the Council's concern.
Council's consensus was that a setback variance of five to ten feet would be acceptable if this
yielded the best option for all involved parties. Mayor Smith advised the proponent to continue
working with the neighbors to achieve a solution acceptable to all involved.
Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT
APPROVAL TO NORTHVIEW 1ST ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat
"
entitled, "NORTHVIEW 1ST ADDTION , platted by Northview Development, Corporation, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council on February 16, 1999, be and is
hereby granted preliminary plat approval with the following conditions: 1) City Engineer
approval of the cul de sac location; 2) that the relocated cul dg sac not impact wetland areas; 3)
dedication of all lands outside proposed lots to the City; 4) Staff approval of driveway location
to limit amount of fill in floodplain; 5) vacation of unused right -of -way; 6) Developers
Agreement; 7) Final Plat approval; and 8)Subdivision Dedication.
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Resolution adopted.
AVENUE Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation by Planner
Planner Larsen informed the Council that Our Lady of Grace Churc d School is seeking
approval for an addition to its school complex, to be located south a sanctuary and west of
the existing gymnasium. The addition would occupy part o n existing parking lot. The
proposed two story addition would contain a total area of 2 0 square feet, and would provide
ten new classrooms and a multi- purpose room. T addition would be connected to the
sanctuary and gymnasium.
Planner Larsen explained the proposed ex sion area is currently a parking lot containing 112
spaces. The addition would reduce the t to fifty spaces. After the addition, there would be a
total of 345 parking spaces on -site. dina Code would require 300 parking spaces, therefore,
available parking exceeds dema and no variance would be required.
Planner Larsen said the oposed addition would provide space needed to handle the existing
and projected schoo opulation. The addition would allow the school to house three sections
each of grades K- . The proposed facility is not expected to create additional parking demand
during peak vity periods. Planner Larsen added the proposed addition would provide a 56
foot setba from the southerly property line, where a 50 foot minimum setback is required. All
Page 5
t Nine bile Creek Watershed District
The Board of Managers of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District has reviewed the plans and
grading and land alteration permit application as submitted to the District for the Northview First
Addition in Edina
The District notes that an encroachment into the floodplain of Nine Mile Creek is proposed by. this
project. It has been calculated that a 15.5 percent encroachment into the floodplain is proposed,
which meets the District's maximum allowable 20 percent floodplain area encroachment criteria.
The District will require that a restrictive covenant be placed on the titles to two lots within this
subdivision stating that no further fill or encroachment into the floodplain will be allowed.
The District also notes that wetlands. meeting the requirements of the 1991 Wetland Conservation
Act are shown on the grading plan. The District is the Local Government Unit (LGM
administering the requirements of the Conservation Act in Edina. The plans indicate that no
filling within wetland areas is proposed; however, the District must field verify the limits of the
delineated wetlands prior to work adjacent to the wetland area This field verification must be
undertaken during the defined growing season — usually May 15- September 15.
Because of.the sensitivity of the area, floodplain and wetlands, the District will require a
performance bond or letter of credit in the amount of $8,500. This security will enable the District
to restore disturbed areas and/or install or repair erosion control, should it become necessary.
With this noted, the Managers approve of the grading and land alteration permit subject to the
following conditions:
1. All conditions as outlined in the attached General Provisions are applicable. .
2. The District will require that a covenant be placed on the titles to the two lots, stating that
certification must be submitted to the District stating that the finished floor elevation has
been constructed at or above the minimum floor elevation, 872 MSL, referenced.
3. The District requires that the two homes to be constructed must have a low floor elevation
set at or above elevation 872 MSL. This elevation is two feet above the 100 -year frequency
flood elevation of Nine Mile Creek. A covenant must be placed on the titles to these lots
stating the minimum allowable low floor elevation. These covenants must be submitted to
the District's legal advisor for review and approval prior to the commencement of
construction.
Board of Managers
Bob Kojetin - Edina
Aileen Kulak - Bloomington
Floyd Laumann - Bloomington
Engineering Advisor.
Legal Advisor:
3�
;
Barr Engineering Co.
Krebsbach & Haik
7014th Avenue South
• . ' '
•
8300 Norman Center Drive
Suite 300.
Suite 500
�•
Minneapolis, MN 55437
Minneapolis, -MN 55415
March 24, 1999
Ph. 832 -2600
Ph. 333 -7400
Mr. Jeffrey Gustafson
Northview Development Corporation
13241 Holasek Lane
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
Re: Permit #99 -09: Northview First Addition: Edina
Dear Mr. Gustafson:
The Board of Managers of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District has reviewed the plans and
grading and land alteration permit application as submitted to the District for the Northview First
Addition in Edina
The District notes that an encroachment into the floodplain of Nine Mile Creek is proposed by. this
project. It has been calculated that a 15.5 percent encroachment into the floodplain is proposed,
which meets the District's maximum allowable 20 percent floodplain area encroachment criteria.
The District will require that a restrictive covenant be placed on the titles to two lots within this
subdivision stating that no further fill or encroachment into the floodplain will be allowed.
The District also notes that wetlands. meeting the requirements of the 1991 Wetland Conservation
Act are shown on the grading plan. The District is the Local Government Unit (LGM
administering the requirements of the Conservation Act in Edina. The plans indicate that no
filling within wetland areas is proposed; however, the District must field verify the limits of the
delineated wetlands prior to work adjacent to the wetland area This field verification must be
undertaken during the defined growing season — usually May 15- September 15.
Because of.the sensitivity of the area, floodplain and wetlands, the District will require a
performance bond or letter of credit in the amount of $8,500. This security will enable the District
to restore disturbed areas and/or install or repair erosion control, should it become necessary.
With this noted, the Managers approve of the grading and land alteration permit subject to the
following conditions:
1. All conditions as outlined in the attached General Provisions are applicable. .
2. The District will require that a covenant be placed on the titles to the two lots, stating that
certification must be submitted to the District stating that the finished floor elevation has
been constructed at or above the minimum floor elevation, 872 MSL, referenced.
3. The District requires that the two homes to be constructed must have a low floor elevation
set at or above elevation 872 MSL. This elevation is two feet above the 100 -year frequency
flood elevation of Nine Mile Creek. A covenant must be placed on the titles to these lots
stating the minimum allowable low floor elevation. These covenants must be submitted to
the District's legal advisor for review and approval prior to the commencement of
construction.
Board of Managers
Bob Kojetin - Edina
Aileen Kulak - Bloomington
Floyd Laumann - Bloomington
Mr. Jeffrey Gustafson
March 24, 1999
Page 2
4. Because of the sensitivity of the area, the District will require a performance bond or letter
of credit in the amount of $8,500. This security will enable the District to restore disturbed
areas and/or install or repair erosion control, should it become necessary. This security
must be submitted to the District's legal advisor for review and approval prior to the
commencement of construction on the site.
If you have any questions regarding the conditions of the District's permit, please call us at
832 -2600.
Engineers for the District
Approved by the Board of Managers
NINE MILE CRE K WA ERSHED DISTRICT
u '/p
(&- -_President
Date:
RCO/Iah
Enclosure
c: Floyd Laumann
Paul Haik
Fran Hoffman
Craig Larson.
204948
revised development plan
- 164.29' 360.09.....
X 9 7.53
180.00
I I
J
eqo
.:
:J
I
Lot ' 36.446:0
.f;
-?
= ''.r, >, Lot Z- 7.1,775.02 so. ft --
I
--
—SG
- - -- -
r
- --
k.
\ \\
882
i
\�. ..E=
'
LFE. =872,ll,.
I
'w,.q3 `
'.. a -,•
-
=876 r „,,;,,
_ _ - _
m � FFE 882
N .
a \
........GFE
w,,,,.3•'
I
o LFE =873.
�...
\ GFE., 877
\f L006 PLAIN '.
.;.� ..._..
977
F•l Ol9
i
'LiJ
8
. _
%S
g75
CV
O
:, • , `
Fill 1 133 Sq.Ft.
\ a.;, .
Z
SQ
W ACP
87,
�1•
0�7 ��
Fill 2006 `Sq.F .
' FL000' PLAIN-
'•, '' -A EV. 870
'A
...
7• vNnw. s[w[n
'._ _. •,.
5 EWR
_- Oq
”
;
L�
_. -. .�
er
\
o
\ I 70.5
O
o
\
\\
L
/
Total Existing Below 870 = 28804 Sq.Ft.
,-
Total Approved Fill = 4500 Sq.Ft. (15.6X)
�
_
i,8�0.0� i
1
\ Revised Total Proposed Fill = 3233 Sq.Ft. (11.5X)
\ �
�
I cp tlf
\ Jo•
\ \/
� �
EDGE OF
WETLAND
0
H
NA,
,a (g
H�
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To:
Mayor & City Council
Agenda Item: III. D.
From:
Craig Larsen
Consent ❑
City Planner
Information Only ❑
Date:
May 3, 1999
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
®
To Council
Subject:
Request for Zoning
Action ❑
Motion
Ordinance Amendment.
❑
Resolution
English Rose Suites.
❑
Ordinance
609 Blake Road.
®
Discussion
Attached to this cover is a request by the owner of English Rose Suites, at 609
Blake Road, to increase the number of residents allowed at this residential facility from
six to eight. Current ordinance and statute requirements limit the number of residents
to six in a single family home. Consequently, staff has advised the owner that we may
not approve the additional residents under existing rules.
Currently, the Zoning Ordinance is silent on non - traditional residential
occupancies in the R -1, Single Dwelling District. Instead, we rely on preemption
clauses in state statute which define what residential uses are to be permitted in the R-
1 district. In this case M.S. 462.357 subd. 7 states "...a state licensed residential
facility or a housing with services establishment registered under chapter 144D serving
six or fewer persons..... shall be considered a permitted single family use for the
purposes of zoning..." English Rose Suites is registered with the state under chapter
144D as a housing with services facility.
Subd. 8 of the same statute says that residential facilities serving between 7 and
16 residents shall be considered a permitted multi - family use. This subdivision also
says that cities may allow residential facilities defined as permitted multi- family uses in
a single family dwelling. It appears this would be accomplished through a Conditional
Use Permit system. The owner of English Rose Suites is requesting that we adopt
such a permit system. (Please refer to the envelop containing a letter and video tape
submitted in support of this request.)
Adopting a Conditional Use Permit system creates some potential problems.
Staff has the following concerns relative to establishing a permit system:
• The permit may not be limited to facilities registered under chapter 144D, but
must also include other state licensed residential facilities and licensed day
care facilities.
• The city may adopt a permit system and establish conditions "... in order to
assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility, provided that no
conditions shall be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than
those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses in the same
zones..."
• All properties zoned R -1 would be eligible to apply for such a permit.
• Our policy has been to adhere strictly to the standards provided in State law,
and not to adopt a Conditional Use Permit system, believing that policy to be
more fair to operators of residential facilities and neighbors as well.
If the Council desires to consider such a system, we would suggest referral to
the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation.
k SUITES �N
a comfortable place to hang my hat...
April 26, 1999
Dennis Maetzold
Mayor Pro tem
5110 Arden Avenue
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Maetzold:
Hello, my name is Geralyn Momson, I am a Gerontological Nurse who is the Owner, Developer and
Administrator of English Rose Suites (ERS) a residential Alzheimer's care home located at 609 Blake
Road South, Edina. ERS was established in September of 1997 and is licensed by the State Health
Department and the City of Edina.
Pat Tucker and myself have recently met with Craig Larsen inquiring what the process would be to
increase ERS from 6 to 8 residents. After research done by Mr. Larsen, I was informed that the state
health statue reads any greater than 6 residents will need a conditional use permit from the city the care
home resides in. It is at this time that I am respectively requesting the city of Edina to adopt a conditional
use permit process allowing ERS to care for 2 additional residents.
Currently ERS has 6 residents who reside in our care home, they receive 24 hour specialized care
provided by Home Health Aids and a Registered Nurse with a Full time Home Director. We have 4
families on our waiting list that are struggling with the caretaking of their loved one struck with this
devastating disease. As a business owner and professional dedicated to leading the industry by providing
a premiere care setting with high quality care for these unfortunate individuals and families it is heart
wrenching to be limited to care for only 6 residents. When statistics are showing that the average length
of stay in a home such as ERS is two years, this means that the families on our waiting list will be forced
to place their loved one in an institution or they will die before they ever get the chance to receive our
care.
The home itself is 3,300 square feet currently with 6 private suites. How we plan to incorporate the space
for 2 more residents is very simple and non - invasive. One of the private suites on the main level will be
converted into a semi - private suite by placing a panel curtain privacy screen in the middle of the room.
The other suite will be created in 'an area in the oversized family room by adding two 2x4 walls. As you
can see there will be no external addition or major construction needs to accommodate these 2 residents.
There will be minimal if any increased parking needs since staffing will not need to be increased to
accommodate these two additional residents. The only time that there may be an additional car in the
driveway would be from family visits. Personally, I don't see this as an issue since my driveway
accommodates parking for ten vehicles and on average there is three cars in the driveway at any given
time.
609 Blake Road South ♦ Edlu, Mn 55343 ♦ 612 - 938 -0909 • fag: 612- 938 -2711
.IA.:......, n..sa,. HA �..,.e - e 4/> 1 !7 raro uemo
The surrounding neighbors will not be affected by this change, matter of fact, they probably will not even
know the difference. Enclosed you will find endorsements from my immediate neighbors showing their
support. I also have the support of the State Health Department, current resident families and other
community leaders.
I am asking you to please take a sincere consideration for my request. As the National Alzheimer's
Association statistics show 10% of the population over age 65 has Alzheimer's and by age 85 it takes a
staggering jump to 50 %. In fact, it's the fourth leading cause of death among American adults. With this
percentage there is a very good chance that either yourself or a loved one will be in a position to find a
new home where all care needs will be met. It is my sincere hope, that it is in a dignified care setting
such as English Rose Suites.
Thank you for your consideration for my request. I look forward to seeing you at the city council meeting
on Monday, May P.
,C
and President
Encl. Surrounding cities regulations
Neighborhood Map & Endorsements
ERS Video Tape
cc: Pat Tucker
Craig Larsen
U4/29i8b 1;::U4 rA3 UZI roya
t
r• .re � r, },
_ .... ..-. •I�IA.tC'�hY • ASE • .. o .140
V)
It
0g
—
ij( 17) - o
107 94 so
so
�(47) 8 i 13
L,.0 6 4'2
n 417(44)
e 60 m
649 �
94 S 1
i lot 9 Iry 2 9gZ0
eal 9312
S7 o+' a a WATERMAN �
d a u7 -
u9.20 tp lASt C or Sill 114. k 1.4
tOAAfMS GS !Qtlpp.
0 -� wfr9�► 5;
(791 (78) �. . �' S 175
At
r"
6
(42)
300
Ill.—
NEIGHBORHOOD ENDORSEMENTS
/1 0
�X''I t 9-L�' j
63 / 3
6 -k �o 3 0 9 s � '� 13, �
Coo,6 -B&A,'Rd:, �§ '
Ls-u, �,mv w 6y\- 417-0 Get i 1'- 45 A �u . 4+, ctdQ—
AG' pp�- S
(f 6
a�g-m� 4c-
ct
XJ� SUITES J1Q, /1W�
a comfortableylace to hang my hat...
April 26, 1999JL C �"
(� 3 01�
Dennis Maetzold
Mayor Pro tern
5110 Arden Avenue
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Maetzold:
Hello, my name is Geralyn Momson, 1 am a Gerontological Nurse who is the Owner, Developer and
Administrator of English Rose Suites (ERS) a residential Alzheimer's care home located at 609 Blake
Road South, Edina. ERS was established in September of 1997 and is licensed by the State Health
Department and the City of Edina.
Pat Tucker and myself have recently met with Craig Larsen inquiring what the process would be to
increase ERS to 8 residents. After research done by Mr. Larsen, I was informed that the state health
statue reads any greater than 6 residents will need a conditional use permit from the city the care home
resides in. It is at this time that I am respectively requesting the city of Edina to adopt a conditional use
permit process allowing ERS to care for 2 additional residents.
Currently ERS has 6 residents who reside in our care home, they receive 24 hour specialized care
provided by Home Health Aids and a Registered Nurse with a Full time Home Director. We have 4
families on our waiting list that are struggling with the caretaking of their loved one struck with this
devastating disease. As a business owner and professional dedicated to leading the industry by providing
a premiere care setting with high quality care for these unfortunate individuals and families it is heart
wrenching to be limited to care for only 6. residents. When statistics are showing that the average length
of stay in a home such as ERS is two years, this means that the families on our waiting list will be forced
to place their loved one in an institution or they will die before they ever get the chance to receive our.
care.
The home itself is 3,300 square feet currently with 6 private suites. How we plan to incorporate the space
for 2 more residents is very simple and non - invasive. One of the private suites on the main level will be
converted into a.semi- private suite by placing a panel curtain privacy screen in the middle of the room.
The other suite will be created in an area in the oversized family room by adding two 2x4 walls. As you
can see there will be no external addition or major construction needs to accommodate these 2 residents.
There will be minimal if any increased parking needs since staffing will not need to be increased to
accommodate these two additional residents. The only time that there may be an additional car in the
driveway would be from family visits. Personally, I don't see this as an issue since my driveway
accommodates parking for ten vehicles and on average there is three cars in the driveway at any given
time.
609 Blake Road south • Edina, Mn 55343 • 612 - 938 -0909 4 faX: 612- 938 -2711
Mimesota Statutes 1998, 462.357 Pagc 3 of 4
1 and alterations renders the obtaining of such written consent
impractical, and such planning commission or rlsnning board
shall report in writing as to whether in its opinion the
proposals of the Governing body in any case are reasonably
rclated to the overall needs of the community, to existing land
use, or to a plan for future land use, and shall have conducted
a public hearing on such proposed ordinance, changes or
alterations, of which hearing published notice shall have been
given in a daily newspaper of general circulation at least once
each week for three successive weeks prior to such hearing,
which notice shall state the time, place and purpose of such
hearing, and shall have reported to the governing body of the
city its findings and recommendations in T- iting.
Subd. 6. Appeals and adjusr=eata. Appeals to the
board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected
person upon compliance with any reasonable conditions iTt'posed by
the zoning ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments has
the following powers with respect to the zoning ordinances
(1) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that
there is an error in any order, requirement, decision, or
determination made by an administrative officer in the
enforcement of the Zoning ordinance.
(2) To hear requests for variances from the literal
provieiots of the ordinance in instances where their strict
enforcement would cause 'endue hardship because of circumstancas
unique to the individual property under consideration, and to
grant ouch variances only when it is demonstrated that such
actions will be it keeping with the spirit and intent of the
ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the
granting of a variance means the property in question Cannot be
put.to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the
official controls, tha plight of the landowner is due to
circumstances unique to the property not created by the
landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the locality, rconomic considerations
alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use
for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Undue
hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access
to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be
granted :or earth sheltered construction as defined in section
216C.06, subdivision 2, when in harmony with the ordinance. The
board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the
case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not
permitted under the ordinance for property in the zone where the
affected person's land is located. The board or governing body
as the case may be, may permit as a variance the temporary use
of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The bard or
governing body as the case may be may impose conditions
granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect
adjacent properties.
Subd. 6a. Normal residential eurrouadings for
handicappod. It is the policy of this state that handicapped
persons and children should not be excluded by municipal zoning
ordinances or other land use regulations from the benefits of
normal residential surroundings. For purposes of subdivisions
6a through 9, ,person" has the meaning given in section 245A.09,
subdivision 11.
5ubd. 7. permitted single family tea®. A elate
licensed residential facility or a housing with cervices
establishment registered under chapter 144D serving six or fewer
persons, a licensed day care facility serving 12 or fewer
persons, and a group family day care facility licensed under
Minnesota Rules, parts 9502.0319 to 95D2.9449 to serve 14 or
http: / /www. revisor. leg .state.uuLas /stats /462/357.html 4123/99
Minnesota Statutes 1998; 462.357 Page 4 of 4
fewer children shall be considered a permitted single family
residential use of property for, the purposes cf zoning, except
that a residential facility whose primary purpose is to treat
juveniles who have violated criminal statutes relating to sex
en adjudicated delinquent on the basis of
offenses or have bls
conduct in violation of criminal statutes relating to sex
offenses shall not be considered a permitted use
subd. 8. permitted multifamily use. Except as -
otherwise provided in subdivision 7 or in any town, municipal' or
county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a
state licensed residential facility serving from 7 through 16
,persons or a licensed day care facility serving from 13 through
16- persons shall be eonaidered a permitted multifamily
residential use of property for purposes of zoning. A township,
municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional
use or special use permit ill order to assure proper maintenance
and operation of a facility, provided that no conditions shall'
be _imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than those
imposed on other conditional -uses or special uses of residential
property in the same genes, unless the additional conditions are -
necessary to protect the health and safety of the residente.of
the residential facility. Vothing heroin shall be construed to
exclude or prohibit residential or day care facilities from
single family zcnes if otherwise permitted by a local zoning
regulation.
HIST: 1965 c 670 s 7; 1969:0 259 a 1; 1973 c!23 art 3 s 7;
1973 c 379 s 41 1973 c 539 s 1; 1973 c $59 8 1,2; 1975 C 60 s 2;
1976 c 766 s 14,15; EX1979 C g s 42,43; 1981 c 356 8 248; 1992 c
490 s 2; 1982 c 507 s 22; 1984 c 617 s 6 -B; 1985 c 62 a 3; 1965
c 194 s Z!; 1986 c 4441 1981 c 333 a 22; 1989 c 82 s 2; 1990 c
391 at 0 224 sr 958 1997�c1113 s 208 2
1997c'200 +art 4�e45; 1997sc3202g c
art
4 s 11; 1997 c 216 s 138
Copyright 1988 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
http; / /www. revisor. leg .statesnn.us /stats/467357,htMI
4123199
NEIGHBORING CITY REGULATIONS
ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES FOR
ALTERNATIVE USE
Minnetonka
R1= Single family residential permits group residential license care facilities up to 6.
Greater than 6 apply for a conditional use permit.
Bloomington
R1= Single family residential persons or facilities of 6 or fewer with subject to a licensed
state permit is allowed.
7 or greater need conditional use permit for Board & Lodging.
Minneapolis
RSF 1 -3= Single family residential for up to 6.
Greater than 6 may need a conditional use permit.
Plymouth
RSF1 -4 = Single family use permitted if 6 or less.
Greater than 6 need a conditional use permit.
k�9SN��l�
o e
TO:
FROM.
VIA.
SUBJECT.'
AGENDA ITEM iv. (c)
DATE: May 3, 1999
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
WILLIAM BERNHJELM, CHIEF OF POLICE
GORDON L. HUGHES, CITY MANAGER
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Enhanced 911 Phone System
COMPANY
1. Independent Emergency Service (IES) 1.
2. US West 2•
3. - 3.
RECOMMENDED BID:
Independent Emergency Services (IES)
GENERAL INFORMATION:
BID AMOUNT
$ 78,219
$171,951
The current 911 phone system was originally installed in 1982 and replacement is
necessary due to unavailability of replacement parts and components, changes in
technology, non- compliance with Y2K and inability to handle new area codes.
The IES CML system meets and exceeds all necessary specifications and standards
and has come highly recommended by other cities and counties.
This project will be funded with Equipment Replacement funds and dedicated 911
funds.
Signature
The Recommended id i
Gordon L. Mighk City Manager
Department
Within Budget El Not Within Budget
J n Wallin, Finance Director
/1A,r�
e
U)
�NCbRPo lEQ�
TO:
FROM:
VIA:
SUBJECT
DATE:
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
Mayor Smith 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
April 23, 1999
AGENDA ITEM IV. B
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Treatment of Lakes & Ponds.
Company Amount of Quote or Bid
1. Lake Management, Inc. 1. $19,483.00
2. Lake Restoration, Inc. 2. $19,574.00
3. Midwest Aqua Care, Inc. 3. $24;990.00
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
Lake Management, Inc. $19,483.00
Account #: 0902 -4201
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This is-for purchase of the annual contracted treatment-of numerous lakes and ponds-throughout
Edina for the control of various undesirable aquatic weeds and algae. There are 37 different lakes
and ponds on the. list that are treated. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources issues
permits to the contractor for proper treatment of these public waters.
This project is funded by the Utility Fund.
John Kep irector
This Recommended bid is
within budget not within
Edina Park and Recreation
Department
zdggt %' Zo . _W lin,! Inance Director
N`
Gordon Hu' es�hty Manager
01 1
o e tt
U)
v �y
leas
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis J. Hoffman
�l�
- - - -- - - - -- -City - Engineer- -- - " -
Date: 3 May, 1999
Subject: Feasibility Report -
Improvement TS -27
Traffic Signal Control
System - W. 76th Street &
Edinborough Way
Set Hearing Date -
Mav 17.1999
Recommendation:
Set hearing date of May 17, 1999.
Info /Background:
Agenda Item # V.A.
Consent
- -- Information -Only
Mgr. Recommends
Action
❑ To H RA
® To Council
® Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
This proposed project is for the installation of a traffic signal at Edinborough Way and
W. 76th Street. This has been a request made in the past by residents, but was not
warranted for installation. With the addition of Office Buildings No. 3 and No. 4 of
Centennial Lakes, the signal is justified and warranted. The estimated cost for
improvement TS -27 is $154,260.00. The project would be funded by state aid for 50 %,
25% assessed to the office projects and the remaining 25% by assessment to
Ebenezer, Centennial Lakes Homes and Edinborough Townhomes. The project is
considered feasible and staff would suggest a hearing date of May 17, 1999.
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis J. Hoffman -
- - ^ - -- - Director of-Public-Works---
Date: 3 May, 1999
Subject: Well #10 -Pump Renovation
and Well Development -
Change Order
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # y. B.
Consent Z
-- Information- On1y- --- ❑- - - - - -- - - - - --
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
® To Council
Action ® Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Approve change order for Cahoy, Inc. to install new pump bowls and repair casing to
allow removal of excess sand by bailing out material.
Info /Background:
Cahoy, Inc. is the contractor replacing a portion of Water Well No. 10. Their original bid
was for $23,500.00. The bid was competitive with other bidders. During the well
renovation, it was discovered that a problem existed in the casing at approximately 600
feet underground. Some sand had accumulated in the lower 20 percent of the well
field. The original bid included removal but with the problem discovered with the
casing, the contractor was unable to perform the work as planned.
An alternative method was devised to repair the casing and remove the sand from the
well. This method requires bigger equipment to do the job and another more expensive
technique. Thus, the estimated additional cost is approximately $6,500.00. Also, when
the pump assembly was dismantled, the bowl assembly was sufficiently worn to require
replacement. Replacing the bowl assembly is the prudent choice as this well will not
be removed again for several years. The bowl assembly cost is $6,082.00. Thus, staff
is recommending a change order for $12,582.00 for approval to properly repair the well.
This type of repair is somewhat unused for well renovation. Normally well renovations
will vary between $12,000 to $18,000 if no problems arise during renovation. In the
past twenty years, there has been a couple of other instances where unexpected issues
arose requiring greater expense to properly renovate the well. In those cases, the
totals for renovation were between $35,000 and $40,000.
a
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REPORURECOMMENDATION
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
WILLIAM BERNHJELM
CHIEF OF POLICE
APRIL 30,1999
SUBJECT: LIQUOR ENFORCEMENT
POLICY
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # V. (c)
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
® To Council
Action Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
Discussion
Approve the proposed Liquor Enforcement Schedule.
InfoBackground:
The Police Department proposes the attached policy and violations schedule for enforcement of the
liquor ordinance. The proposed administrative response would be conducted by City staff via
written notice of penalty to the license holder. An appeal of the scheduled fine or suspension would
be scheduled for a hearing before the City Council. The policy is structured to minimize the number
of actions necessary at the Council level.
LIQUOR AND WINE VIOLATIONS
ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE
PURPOSE
Develop an enforcement schedule to insure a swift and consistent response to violations of City Code
900.
To insure immediate criminal court referral for individuals and administrative penalties for license
holders in response to violations occurring in establishments licensed to sell alcoholic beverages.
POLICY STATEMENT
A dual response system will be used for the purpose of establishing enforcement response for violations
of all State Statutes and City Codes occurring in and near licensed establishments.
Criminal enforcement against an individual will not bar or delay administrative action against a license
holder.
CRIMINAL RESPONSE: Officers observing criminal activity in or around licensed establishments will
take direct enforcement action against responsible individuals in accordance with State law, City Code
and Department policy. This enforcement action may include court referral by citation, formal complaint
process, or arrest. In all cases a report shall be completed which includes the relationship of the violation
to the operation of the establishment, the manager responsible for the licensed establishment, the
manager's response to officer's notification of the violation, and the manager's attitude.
ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSE: Administrative action will be taken against license holders for
violations of State Statute or City Code in accordance with the following presumptive penalty matrix.
The Administrative penalty shall be determined on the basis of the history of violations for the preceding
(24) month period. Reinspection will occur within 60 days following a violation.
TYPE OF VIOLATION
1. Commission of a felony
related to the licensed
activity
2. Sale of alcoholic
beverages while license is
under suspension
3. Adult Entertainment
4. Sale of Intoxicating liquor
where only license is for
3.2 percent malt liquor
1 st vio. 2nd vio.
Revocation NA
Revocation NA
Revocation NA
Revocation NA
Refusal to allow City $1,000.00 $2,000.00
inspectors or Police Fine Fine
admission to inspect 3 day 7 day
premises Suspension Suspension
3rd vio.
NA
NA
NA
4th vio.
NA
NA
1
NA NA
Revocation NA
6. Sale of alcoholic
$500.00
beverages to under -age
Fine
person
7. Afteribefore hours sale
$500.00
of alcoholic beverages
Fine
8. After hours consumption $500.00
of alcoholic beverages Fine
9. Illegal gambling or $500.00
prostitution on premises Fine
10. Failure to take reasonable
$500.00
steps to stop person from
Fine
leaving premises with
alcoholic beverages
suspension
11. Sale of alcoholic
$500.00
beverages to obviously
Fine
intoxicated person
7 day
12. Allowing disorderly
$500.00
establishment
Fine
13. Person under 18yrs $500.00
serving liquor Fine
14. No licensed manager $250.00
on premises Fine
15. Failure to display Warning
liquor license Letter
16. Warning signs not Warning
displayed Letter
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
Revocation
3 day
7 day
suspension
suspension
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
Revocation
3 day
7 day
suspension
suspension
$1,000.00
$2000.00
Revocation
3 day
7 day
suspension
suspension
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
Revocation
Fine
Fine
3 day
7 day
suspension
suspension
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
Revocation
3 day
7 day
suspension
suspension.
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
Revocation
Fine
Fine _
3 day
7 day
suspension '
suspension
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
Revocation
Fine
Fine
3 day
7 day
suspension
suspension
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
Revocation
Fine
Fine
3 day
7 day
suspension
suspension
$500.00
$1,500.00.
Revocation
Fine
Fine
1 day
7 day
suspension
suspension
$500.00
$1,000.00
$1,500.00
Fine
Fine
Fine
$500.00
$1,000.00
$1,500.00
Fine
Fine
Fine
. _/
° e REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis J. Hoffman
City Engineer 1 r-oR-
Date: May 3, 1999
Subject: Public Hearing - Set Hearing
Date for:
1. Brookview Avenue &
' West 56th Street
Concrete Curb & Gutter
Improvements B -096.
2. Countryside Elementary
Neighborhood Sidewalk
Improvement S -076.
3. Cornelia Elementary
Neighborhood Sidewalk
Improvement S -077.
Recommendation:
Set hearing date of June 1, 1999.
Info /Background:
Agenda Item # V.D.
Consent El
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
® To Council
Action ® Motion
® Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
The City was petitioned by residents _along all of the .above projects. Staff is finalizing
the feasibility reports and will submit to Council prior to Public Hearing. These projects
are feasible and staff would suggest a public hearing date of June 1, 1999.
To: Mayor & City Council
From: John Wallin
Finance Director
Date: May 3, 1999
Subject: General Obligation Utility
Revenue and Refunding
Bonds
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
Agenda Item # VI.AXLB
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends F
To HRA
®
To Council
Action ❑
Motion
®
Resolution
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Approve the attached resolutions for the $3,600,000 General Obligation Utility Revenue
Bonds Series 1999A and the $3,290,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds Series
19998
Info /Background:
Attached is the Resolutions for the $3,600,000 General Obligation Utility Revenue
Bonds Series 1999A and the $3,290,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds Series
1999B as drafted by Dorsey & Whitney. The bids- will be received and tabulated by the
City's financial advisor Springsted Incorporated on Monday May 3. The bids and
Springsted's analysis will be presented to the City Council at the May 3 Council
meeting.
M,
CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO
$3,600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION UTILITIES
REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1999A
Issuer: City of Edina, Minnesota
Governing body: City Council
Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on May 3, 1999, at
7:00 o'clock P.M:, at the Edina City Hall.
Members present:
Members absent:
Documents attached:
Minutes of said meeting including (pages): 1 through 22
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $3,600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION
UTILITIES REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1999A; AWARDING THE
SALE, FIXING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR
THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF AND SECURITY.
THEREFOR
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the
public corporation issuing the obligations referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the
documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original
records of the corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that the
documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing
body of the corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions
taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at the meeting, insofar as they relate
to the obligations; and that the meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and
place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice
given as required by law.
WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this day of
'1999.
Debra Mangen, City Clerk
It was reported that (--) proposals had been received prior to 10:30
A.M., Central Time today for the purchase of the $3,600,000 General Obligation Utilities
Revenue Bonds, Series 1999A of the City in accordance with the Official Statement distributed
by the City to potential purchasers of the Bonds. The proposals have been read and tabulated,
and the terms of each have been determined to be as follows:
Bid for Interest
Name of Bidder Principal Rates
[See attached]
Net Interest
Cost
Councilmember then introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $3,600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION
UTILITIES REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1999A; AWARDING THE
SALE, FIXING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR
THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF AND SECURITY
THEREFOR
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of Edina,
Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. Authorization and Sale of Bonds.
1.01. Authorization. The City owns and operates a municipal storm sewer utility
(the "Storm Water Utility ") and a municipal sanitary sewer and water utility (the "Sewer and
Water Utility," which together with the Storm Water Utility is called the "Utilities "). This
Council has heretofore ordered construction of improvements to the Utilities. This Council
hereby determines to issue and sell $3,600,000 principal amount of General Obligation Utilities
Revenue Bonds, Series 1999A, of the City (the "Bonds ") to defray the expense incurred and
estimated to be incurred by the City in making the Improvements, including every item of cost of
the kinds authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65, and $36,000 representing interest as
provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.56.
1.02. Sale of Bonds. The City has retained Springsted Incorporated, an
independent financial advisor, to assist the City in connection with the sale of the Bonds. The
Bonds are being sold pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph
(9), without meeting the requirements for public sale under Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60,
Subdivision 1. Pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of Sale for the Bonds, (--)
proposals for the purchase of the Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt
of proposals. The proposals have been publicly read and considered, and the purchase price,
interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The
most favorable proposal received is that of
of , and associates (the "Purchaser"), to purchase the Bonds at a price
of $ , the Bonds to bear interest at the rates set forth in Section 3.01. The proposal
is hereby accepted, and the Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to
execute a contract on the part of the City for the sale of the Bonds with the Purchaser. The good
faith checks of the unsuccessful bidders shall be returned forthwith.
1.03. Performance of Requirements. The City is authorized by Minnesota
Statutes, Section 444.075, to issue and sell the Bonds to pay the costs of the Improvements, and
to pledge to the payment of the Bonds net revenues to be derived from charges for the service,
use and availability of the Utilities. The City presently has no outstanding obligations which
constitute a lien on the net revenues of the Utilities. All acts, conditions and things which are
required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen
and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance of the Bonds having been done,
existing, having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for this Council to
establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds
forthwith.
Section 2. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the
following form:
-2-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF EDINA
GENERAL OBLIGATION UTILITIES REVENUE BOND,
SERIES 1999A
Date of
Interest Rate Maturi Original Issue CUSIP
% February 1, May 1, 1999
REGISTERED OWNER:
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: DOLLARS
THE CITY OF EDINA, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City "), acknowledges
itself to be indebted and, for value received, hereby promises to pay to the registered owner
named above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above, on the maturity date
specified above, with interest thereon from the date of original issue specified above, or from the
most recent interest payment date to which interest has been paid or duly provided for, at the
annual rate specified above. Interest hereon is payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year,
commencing February 1, 2000, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close
of business on the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month,
all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of
this Bond before maturity. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof at the
office of the City Finance Director, in Edina, Minnesota, as Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying
Agent (the "Bond Registrar "), or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein,
the principal hereof, are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or
draft of the City or the Bond Registrar if a successor to the City Finance Director as Bond
Registrar has been designated under the Resolution described herein.
This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $3,600,000 (the
"Bonds ") all of like date and tenor except as to serial number, interest rate, redemption privilege
and maturity date, issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on May 3, 1999
(the "Resolution "), for the purpose of financing the costs of improvements to the storm sewer
992
utility and to the sanitary sewer and water utility of the City and is issued pursuant to and in full
conformity with the provisions of the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto
enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Section 444.075 and Chapter 475. For the full and
prompt payment of the principal and interest on the Bonds as the same become due, the full faith,
credit- and - taxing power of the City have..been and are. hereby irrevocably pledged. - The Bonds
are issuable only as fully registered bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any multiple thereof, of
single maturities.
Bonds maturing in the years 2000 through 2007 are payable on their respective
stated maturity dates without option of prior.payment, but Bonds having stated maturity dates in
the years 2008 and 2009 are .each subject to redemption and prepayment, at. the - option of the City
and in whole or in part, and if in part, in the maturities selected by the City and, within any
maturity, in $5,000 principal amounts selected by lot, on February 1, 2007 and on any date
thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus accrued interest to
the date of redemption.
At least thirty days prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond, notice of the
call for redemption will be mailed to the Bond Registrar and to the registered owner of each
Bond to be redeemed at his address appearing in the Bond Register, but no defect in or failure to
give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of the proceedings for the
redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption
having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of the Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on
the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price herein specified and from
and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such
Bond or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon the partial redemption of any Bond, -
a new Bond or.Bonds will _be delivered to the registered owner without charge, representing the
remaining principal amount outstanding.
As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth'therein,
this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar,
by the registered owner hereof in person or by his attorney duly authorized in writing upon
surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar,
duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange
for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange, the City will
cause a new Bond or Bonds to be'issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the
same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same
date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with
respect to such transfer or exchange.
The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name
this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the
-4-
purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond
Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that
all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to
be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond in
order to make this Bond a valid and binding general obligation of the City according to its terms,
have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed in regular and due form as so'
required; that in and by the Resolution, the City has pledged to the payment of the principal of
and interest on the Bonds net revenues of the storm water utility and sanitary sewer and water
utility of the City; that. in and. by- the.Resolution,.the City..has_covenanted and agreed with the__
owner of the Bonds that it will impose and collect charges for the service, use and availability of
its storm water utility and sanitary sewer and water utility at the time and in the amounts required
to produce net revenues adequate to pay all principal of and interest on the Bonds and on all other
bonds payable from net revenues of the storm water utility and sanitary sewer and water utility as
such principal and interest respectively become due; that if needed to pay the principal and
interest on this Bond, ad valorem taxes will be levied upon all taxable property in the City
without limitation as to rate or amount; and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the
indebtedness of the City to'exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation.
This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled
to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall
have been executed by the Bond Registrar by the manual signature of the Bond Registrar, or in
-the event the City Finance Director is no longer acting as Bond Registrar, one of the authorized
representatives of the Bond Registrar.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its
City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed by the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and
the City Manager and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. .
Date of Authentication:
City Manager
CITY OF EDINA
-5-
Mayor
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within.
By
City Finance Director, as Bond Registrar
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this
Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or
regulations:
TEN COM — — as tenants UNIF TRANS MIN ACT....... Custodian....... .
in common (Cust) (Minor)
TEN ENT — — as tenants
by the entireties
JT TEN — — as joint tenants
with right of
survivorship and
not as tenants in
common
under Uniform Transfers to Minors
Act......................
(State)
Additional abbreviations may also be used.
1.1
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers
unto the
within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints
attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books
kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises.
Dated:
PLEASE-INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY
OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER
OF ASSIGNEE:
Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an
"eligible guarantor institution"
meeting the requirements of the
Bond Registrar, which requirements
include membership or participation
in the Securities Transfer Association
Medalion Program (STAMP) or such
other "signature guaranty program"
as may be determined by the Bond
Registrar in addition to or in
substitution for STAMP, all in
accordance with the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
NOTICE: The signature(s) to
this assignment must correspond with the name
as it appears upon the face of
the within Bond in every particular,
without alteration, enlargement
or any change whatsoever.
Section 3. Bond Terms, Execution and Delivery.
3.01. Maturities Interest Rates, Denominations, Payment, Dating of Bonds. The
City shall forthwith issue and deliver the Bonds, which shall be denominated "General
Obligation Utilities Revenue Bonds, Series 1999A." The Bonds shall be dated as of May 1,
1999, shall be issuable in the denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, shall
mature on February 1 in the years and amounts set forth below, and Bonds maturing in such years
-7-
and amounts shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the
rates per annum set forth opposite such years and amounts as follows:
Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate
2000 2005
2001 2006
2002 2007
2003 2008
2004 2009
The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form, of single maturities.,.
The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond at the principal office of the Registrar
described herein, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the
.Registrar. Each Bond shall be-dated by the Registrar as of the date of its authentication.
3.02. Interest Payment- Dates. -- Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on
February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2000, to the owners thereof as
such appear of record in the bond register as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the
immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. Interest on the Bonds
will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year consisting of twelve 30 -day months and will be
rounded pursuant to the rules of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.
3.03. Registration. The City shall appoint, and shall maintain, a bond registrar,
-.transfer agent and-paying agent-(the-Registrar). The-effect of registration -and the rights and
duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows:
(a) Re ig ster. The Registrar shall keep at its principal office a bond register in
which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the
registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or
exchanged.
(b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender to the Registrar for transfer of any Bond
duly endorsed by the registered owner- thereof or accompanied by a -written instrument of
transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner
thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar
shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one
or more new -Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the
transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer
after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such
interest payment date.
E
(c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bond is surrendered by the registered
owner for exchange, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds
of a like aggregate principal amount, interest rate and maturity, as requested by the
registered owner or the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing.
(d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange shall be
promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the
Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that
the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and
that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for
its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or
unauthorized.
(f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner
of such Bond, whether such Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving
payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Bond and for all other
purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the
owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the City
upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds (except for
an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge
upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other
governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange.
(h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become
mutilated or be lost, stolen or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like
amount, number, interest rate, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for
and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond. or in lieu of and in substitution for any
such Bond lost, stolen or destroyed, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and
charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond lost, stolen or
destroyed, upon receipt by the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Bond was
lost, stolen or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon receipt by the Registrar
of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in
which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so
surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation
shall be given to the City. If the mutilated, lost, stolen or destroyed Bond has already
matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be
necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment.
M
3.04. Appointment of Initial Re isg tray. The City hereby appoints the City
Finance Director, as the initial Registrar. In the event that the City determines to discontinue the
book entry-only system for the Bonds as described in paragraph (c) of Section 3.07, or DTC, as
defined in Section 3.07, determines to discontinue providing its services with respect to the
Bonds and a new securities depository is not appointed for the Bonds, the City will designate a - --
suitable bank or trust company to act as successor Registrar if the City Finance Director is then
acting as Registrar. The City reserves the right to remove any Registrar upon thirty (30) days'
notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor
Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar.
-- - 3.05. Redemption. -Bonds maturing in the. years 2000 through 2007 are payable
on their respective stated maturity dates without option of prior payment, but Bonds maturing in .
2008 and 2009 are each subject to redemption, at the option of the City and in whole or in part,
and if in part, in the maturities. selected by the City and, within any maturity, in $5,000 principal - --
amounts selected by the,Registrar by lot, on February 1, 2007 and on any date thereafter, at a
redemption price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus accrued interest to
the date of redemption.
At least thirty days prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond, the City shall
cause notice of the call for redemption to be mailed to the Registrar and to the registered owner
of each Bond to be redeemed, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption
shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such
defect or failure. The notice of redemption shall specify the redemption date, redemption price,
the numbers, interest rates and CUSIP numbers of the Bonds to be redeemed and the place at
which the Bonds, are to be surrendered for payment, which is the principal office of the Registrar.
Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions thereof so to
be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price
therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the
redemption price) such Bonds or portions thereof shall cease to bear interest.
Bonds in a denomination larger than $5,000 may be redeemed in part in any
integral multiple of $5,000. The owner of any Bond redeemed in part shall receive without
charge, upon surrender of such Bond to the Registrar, one or more new Bonds in authorized
denominations equal in principal amount to be unredeemed portion of the Bond so surrendered. - -
3.06. Preparation and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction
of the City Manager and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor
and the City Manager; provided that said signatures may be printed, engraved, or lithographed
facsimiles thereof. In case any officer whose signature, or a facsimile of whose signature, shall
appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such
signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if
such officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond
111111
shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this
Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on such Bond has been duly executed
by the manual signature of the Registrar, or in the event the City Finance Director is no longer
acting as Registrar, an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication
on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of
authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and
delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have been so executed and authenticated, they
shall be delivered by the City Manager to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in
accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser shall not be
obligated to see to the application of the purchase price.
3.07. Securities Depository. (a) For purposes of this Section the following terms
shall have the following meanings:
"Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person
in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on
the records of such Participant, or such person's subrogee.
"Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor
nominee of DTC with respect to the Bonds.
"DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York.
"Participant" shall mean any broker - dealer, bank or other financial institution for
which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository.
"Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter from the City to
DTC previously executed by the City and on file with DTC.
(b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered
bonds, and one Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds.
Upon initial issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the bond register in the
name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. The Registrar and the City may treat DTC (or its
nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of
payment of the principal of -or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereof to be
redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of
Bonds under this resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes
whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
Neither the Registrar nor the City shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant,
any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any
Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the bond register as being a registered
owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any
-11-
Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to
the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or required
to be given to owners of Bonds under this resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC or any
Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of the Bonds, or
with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Bonds.
So long as any Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the Registrar
shall pay all principal of and interest on such Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to such
Bond, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with the Representation Letter, and all such payments
shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to the
principal of and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other
than DTC shall receive an -authenticated Bond for - each separate_stated maturity evidencing the
obligation of the City to make payments of principal and interest. Upon delivery by DTC to the
Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in
place of Cede- & -Co., the" -Bonds will -be- transferable to such-new -nominee in accordance with
paragraph -(d) hereof..
(c) In the event the City determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial
Owners that they be able to obtain Bonds in the form of bond certificates, the City may notify
DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants of the availability, through
DTC of Bonds in the form of certificates. In such event, the Bonds will be transferable in
accordance with paragraph (d) hereof. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services
with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and the Registrar and
discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event the
Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (d) hereof.
(d) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under
paragraph (b) or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the
Registrar of the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to
the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. In the event Bonds
in the form of certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee
for DTC as owner of all the Bonds, or another securities depository as owner of all the Bonds, the
provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without
limitation, the printing of such Bonds in -the form of bond certificates-and-the method -of payment
- of principal -of and- interest -on such- Bonds -in- the - form -of -bond certificates.
Section 4. Security Provisions.
4.01. 1999 Utilities Construction Fund. There is hereby created a special
bookkeeping fund to be designated as the "1999 Utilities Construction Fund" (the "Construction
Fund "), to be held and administered by the City Finance Director separate and apart from all
other funds of the City. The City appropriates to the Construction Fund $3,564,000 of the
proceeds of the sale of the Bonds. The Construction Fund shall be used solely to defray expenses
-12-
,.+
of the Improvements, including but not limited to the transfer to the Bond Fund, created in
Section 4.02 hereof, of amounts sufficient for the payment of interest, due upon the Bonds prior
to the completion of the Improvements and.the,payment of the expenses incurred by the City in
connection with the issuance of the Bonds. Upon completion and payment of all costs of the
Improvements, any balance of the proceeds of Bonds remaining in the Construction Fund may be
used to pay the cost, -in whole or -in part, of any other improvements to the Utilities, -as directed by
the City Council, but any balance of such proceeds not so used shall be credited and paid to the
Bond Fund.
4.02. 1999 Utilities Bond Fund. So long 'as any of the Bonds are outstanding and
any principal_ of. or_interest thereon.unpaid, the City Finance Director shall. mainiain on.its- books_ --
and records a separate and special bookkeeping fund - designated "1999 Utilities Bond Fund" (the
"Bond Fund ") to be used for no purpose other than the payment of the principal of and interest on
the Bonds and any additional obligations of the City payable therefrom,pursuant to Section 4.03
hereof. If the balance in the Bond Fund is.ever insufficient to pay all principal and interest then
due on bonds payable therefrom, the City Finance Director shall nevertheless. provide sufficient
money from any other funds of the City which are available for that purpose, and such other.
funds shall be reimbursed from subsequent receipts of net revenues of the Utilities appropriated
to the Bond Fund and, if necessary, from the proceeds of the taxes levied for the Bond Fund. The
City hereby appropriates to the Bond Fund the accrued interest on the Bonds and any amount in
excess of $3,564,000 received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds and any amounts
transferred to the Bond Fund pursuant to Section 4.01 hereof. The City Finance Director shall
deposit in the Bond Fund the proceeds of all taxes levied and all other money which may at any
time be received for or appropriated to the payment of such bonds and interest,. including the net
revenues of the Utilities herein pledged and appropriated to the Bond Fund, all collections of any
-ad valorem taxes levied -for the - payment -of the Bonds- and.all, other- moneys-received for or
appropriated to the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon.,
There are hereby established two accounts in the Bond Fund, designated as the
"Debt Service Account" and the "Surplus Account." All money appropriated or to be deposited
in the Bond Fund shall be deposited as received into the Debt Service Account. On each
February 1, the City Finance Director shall determine the amount on hand in the Debt Service
Account. If such amount is in excess of one - twelfth of the debt service payable from the Bond
Fund in the immediately preceding 12 months, the City Finance Director shall promptly transfer
--the amount -in excess -to the - Surplus Account. — The -City- appropriates -to the Surplus Account any
amounts to be transferred thereto from the Debt Service Account as herein provided and all
income derived from the investment of amounts-on hand in the Surplus Account. If at any time
the amount on hand in the Debt Service Account is insufficient to meet the requirements of the
Bond Fund, the City Finance Director shall transfer to the Debt Service Account amounts on
hand in the Surplus Account to the extent necessary to cure such deficiency.
-13-
4.03. Imposition of Charges; Additional Bonds. The City hereby covenants and
agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that so long as any of the Bonds are
outstanding, the City will impose and collect reasonable charges for the service, use and
availability of the Utilities to the City and its inhabitants according to schedules calculated to
produce net revenues which; will be sufficient to pay all principal and interest when due on the
Bonds and all other obligations payable from the net revenues of the Utilities. Seventy -two
percent (72 %) of the principal and interest due on the Bonds shall be paid from the net revenues
of the Sewer and Water Utility, and the remaining twenty -eight percent (28 %) of the principal
and interest due_on the Bonds shall be paid from the net revenues of the Storm Water Utility.
Net revenues of the Sewer and Water Utility, to the extent necessary, are hereby irrevocably
pledged -and appropriated- to_the- payment-of-seventy =two percent (72 %) of-the-principal of the
Bonds and interest thereon, and net revenues of the Storm Water Utility, to the extent necessary,
are hereby irrevocably pledged and appropriated to the payment of twenty -eight percent (28 %) of
-the principal of the Bonds and interest - thereon; provided that nothing.herein shall preclude the _
City from hereafter making further pledges and appropriations of net revenues of the Sewer and
Water Utility or Storm Water Utility for the payment of additional obligations of the City
hereafter authorized if the City Council determines before the authorization of such additional
obligations that the estimated net revenues of the Utilities will be sufficient, together with any
other sources pledged to or projected to be used, for the payment of the principal of and interest
on the Bonds and paid therefrom and such additional obligations. Such further pledges and
appropriations of said net revenues may be made superior, or subordinate to or on a parity with
the pledge and appropriation herein made, as to the application of net revenues received from
time to time.
- -- - 4.04.- -Full Faith - and - Credit - Pledged. --The- full - faith- and-credit -of the - City -are --
irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and the interest on the
Bonds and any other obligations payable from the Bond Fund, as such principal and interest
comes due. If the money on hand in the Bond Fund should at any time be insufficient for the
payment of principal and interest then due, this City shall pay the principal and interest out of any
fund of the City, and such other fund or funds shall be reimbursed therefor when sufficient
money is available to the Bond Fund. If on October 1 in any year the sum of the balance in the
Bond Fund plus the available net revenues of the Utilities on hand and estimated to be received
or before the end of the following calendar year is not sufficient with any ad valorem taxes
- - - - - -- heretofore levied-in-accordance-with -the-provisions-of-this -resolution,- to-pay- when due -all
principal and interest become due on all Bonds payable therefrom in said following calendar
year, or the Bond Fund has incurred a deficiency in the manner provided in this Section 4.04, a
direct, irrepealable, ad valorem tax shall be levied on all taxable property within the corporate
limits of the City for the purpose of restoring such accumulated or- anticipated deficiency in an
amount at least 5% in excess of amount needed to make good the deficiency.
Section 5. Defeasance. When any Bond has been discharged as provided in this
Section 5, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of such
-14-
Bonds shall cease, and such Bonds shall no longer be deemed outstanding under this Resolution.
The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bond which is due on any date by
irrevocably depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment
thereof in full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, the City may nevertheless discharge
its obligations with respect thereto by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the
payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit. The City may also at
any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now
or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a
bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized
by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing
on such dates as shall be required, without reinvestment, to pay all principal and interest to
become due thereon to maturity or, if notice of redemption as herein required has been duly
provided for, to such earlier redemption date.
Section 6. County Auditor Registration, Certification of Proceedings, Investment
of Money, Arbitrage, Official Statement and Fees.
6.01. County Auditor Registration. The City Manager is hereby authorized and
directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor of Hennepin County,
together with such other information as the County Auditor shall require, and to obtain from said
County Auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been entered on his bond register as required by
law.
6.02. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the City and the County
Auditor of Hennepin County are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the
Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel to the City, certified copies of all
proceedings and records of the City, and such other affidavits, certificates and information as
may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as the
same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known
to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore
furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the facts recited therein.
6.03. Covenant. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to
time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or
- agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation
under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code "), and Regulations
promulgated thereunder (the Regulations), as such are enacted or promulgated and in effect on
the date of issue of the Bonds, and covenants to take any and all actions within its powers to
ensure that the interest on the Bonds will not become subject to taxation under such Code and
Regulations. The Improvements are public improvements available for use by members of the
general public on a substantially equal basis. The City will not enter into any lease, use
agreement or other contract respecting the Improvements or security for the payment of the
-15-
Bonds which would cause the Bonds to be considered "private activity bonds" or "private loan
bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of 'the Code.
6.04. Arbitrage Rebate. The City shall take such actions as are required to
comply -with the- arbitra a rebate requirements of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Section 148
- - - - arbitrage q O O _ (f) of the - -- -- - - --
Code.
6.05. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and the City Manager, being the
officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this
resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certification in
accordance with the provisions _of.Section 148_of- the - Code,_and the_ Regulations, stating the facts,
estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Bonds which
make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used in a manner that
would cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of the Code and Regulations.
6.06. Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, dated
April 21, 1999, prepared and distributed on behalf of the City by Springsted Incorporated, is - -
hereby approved. Springsted Incorporated is hereby, authorized on behalf of the City to prepare
and distribute to the Purchaser a supplement to the Official Statement listing the offering price, -
the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the underwriters and such other
information relating to the Certificates required to be included in the Official Statement by Rule
15c2 -12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934. Within seven business days from the date hereof, the City shall deliver to the Purchaser
a reasonable number of copies of the Official Statement and such supplement. The officers of
the City are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate - - -- --
concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement.
Section 7. Continuing Disclosure.
(a) Purpose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public availability of certain
information relating to the Bonds and the security therefor and to permit the original purchaser
and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with
amendments to Rule 15c2 -12 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"SEC ") under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.R. § 240.15c2 -12), relating to
continuing disclosure (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, the "Rule "), which will
enhance the marketability of the Bonds, the City hereby makes the following covenants and
agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time of the
Outstanding Bonds. The City is the only "obligated person' in respect of the Bonds within the
meaning of the Rule for purposes of identifying the entities in respect of which continuing
disclosure must be made.
-16
If the City fails to comply with any provisions of this Section 7, any person
aggrieved thereby, including the Owners of any Outstanding Bonds, may take whatever action at
law or in equity may appear necessary or appropriate to enforce performance and observance of
any agreement or covenant contained in this Section 7, including an action for a writ of
mandamus or specific performance. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall
not be recoverable for any default hereunder to the extent permitted by law. Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary contained herein, in no event shall a default under this Section 7
constitute a default under the Bonds or under any other provision of this resolution.
As used in this Section 7, "Owner" or `Bondowner" means, in respect of a Bond,
the registered owner or owners thereof appearing in the bond register maintained by the Registrar
or any `Beneficial Owner" (as hereinafter defined) thereof, if such Beneficial Owner provides to
the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and substance reasonably
satisfactory to the Registrar. As used herein, `Beneficial Owner" means, in respect of a Bond,
any person or entity which (i) has -the power, directly or indirectly, -to vote or consent with respect
to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bond (including persons or entities holding Bonds
through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of the
Bond for federal income tax purposes. As used herein, "Outstanding" when used as of any
particular time with reference to Bonds means all Bonds theretofore, or thereupon being,
authenticated and delivered by the Registrar under this Resolution except (i) Bonds theretofore
canceled by the Registrar or surrendered to the Registrar for cancellation; (ii) Bonds with respect
to which the liability of the City has been discharged in accordance with Section 5 hereof; and
(iii) Bonds for the transfer or exchange or in lieu of or in substitution for which other Bonds shall
have been authenticated and delivered by the Registrar pursuant to this Resolution.
-(b) -Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth
in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the
following information at the following times:
(1) on or before 365 days after the end of each fiscal year of the City,
commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 1999 the following financial information
and operating data in respect of the City (the "Disclosure Information'):
(A) the audited financial statements of the City for such fiscal year,
accompanied by the audit report and opinion of the accountant or government
auditor relating thereto, as permitted or required by the laws of the State of
Minnesota, containing balance sheets as of the end of such fiscal year and a
statement of operations, changes in fund balances and cash flows for the fiscal .
year then ended, showing in comparative form such figures for the preceding
fiscal year of the City, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board as modified
in accordance with the governmental accounting standards promulgated by the
-17-
Governmental Accounting Standards Board or as otherwise provided under
Minnesota law, as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such
financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such generally
accepted accounting principles for reasons beyond the reasonable control of the
City; noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof, and certified as to
accuracy and completeness in all material respects by the fiscal officer of the City;
and
(B) To the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in
paragraph (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year or for the period'most
recently available of the typeset. forth below, which information may be
unaudited, but is to be certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material
respects by the City's financial officer to the best of.his or her knowledge, which
certification may be based on the reliability of information obtained from
governmental or third party sources:
Most recent population estimate; City Property Values; City
Indebtedness; City Tax Rates; Levies and Collections; and Current
General Fund Budget
Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are
not available by the date specified, the City shall provide on or before such date unaudited
financial statements in the format required for the audited financial statements as part of the
Disclosure Information and, within 10 days after the receipt thereof, the City shall provide the
audited financial statements.
Any or all of the Disclosure Information may be incorporated by-reference, if it is
updated as required hereby, from other documents, including official statements, which have
been submitted to each of the repositories hereinafter referred to under subsection (b) or the SEC.
If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from
the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City shall clearly identify in the Disclosure
Information each document so incorporated by reference.
If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the
operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure
Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a
statement to'such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City
operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City
determines that certain specified data regarding such replacement operations would be a.Material
Fact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure
Information shall include such additional specified data regarding the replacement operations.
If the Disclosure Information is changed or this Section 7 is amended as permitted
by this paragraph (b)(1) or subsection (d), then the City shall include in the next Disclosure
-18-
Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for
the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operating data
provided.
(2) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events
which is a Material Fact (as hereinafter defined):
(A) Principal and interest payment delinquencies;
(B) Non - payment related defaults;
(C) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial
difficulties;
(D) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial
difficulties;
(E) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform;
(F) Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax - exempt status of the
security;
(G) Modifications to rights of security holders;
(H) Bond calls;
(I) Defeasances;.
(J) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the
securities; and
(K) Rating changes.
As used herein, a "Material Fact" is a fact as to which a substantial likelihood exists that a
reasonably prudent investor would attach importance thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell a
Bond or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter-the total information otherwise available to an
investor from the Official Statement, information disclosed hereunder or information generally
available to the public. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a "Material Fact" is also an
event that would be deemed "material' for purposes of the purchase, holding or sale of a Bond
within the meaning of applicable federal securities laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of
the occurrence of the event.
(3) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events or
conditions:
(A) the failure of the City to provide the Disclosure Information required
under paragraph (b)(1) at the time specified thereunder;
(B) the amendment or supplementing of this Section 7 pursuant to
subsection (d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any
explanation provided by the City under subsection (d)(2);
(C) the termination of the obligations of the City under this Section 7
pursuant to subsection (d);
-19-
(D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial
statements constituting a portion of the Disclosure Information are prepared; and
(E) any change in the fiscal year of the City.
(c) Manner of Disclosure. The City agrees to make available the information described
in subsection (b) to the following entities by telecopy, overnight delivery, mail or other means, as
appropriate:
(1) the information described in paragraph (1) of subsection (b), to each then nationally
- -
recognized.-municipal- securities -information. repository-under the- Rule and to- any, state --. -
information depository then designated or operated by the State of Minnesota as contemplated by
the Rule (the "State Depository"), if any;
(2) the information described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b), to the
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and to the State Depository, if any; and
(3) the information described in subsection (b), to any rating agency then maintaining a
rating of the Bonds and, at the expense of such Bondowner, to any Bondowner who requests in
writing such information, at the time of transmission under paragraphs (1) or (2) of this
subsection (c), as the case may be, or, if such information is transmitted with a subsequent time
of release, at the time such information is to be released.
(d) Term; Amendments, Interpretation.
(1) The covenants of the City in this Section 7 shall remain in effect so long as any
Bonds. are Outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the
City under this Section 7 shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the
City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that, because of legislative
action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply
with the requirements of this Section 7 will not cause participating underwriters in the primary
offering of the Bonds to be in violation of the Rule or other applicable requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, -as- amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or
amendatory thereof.
(2) This Section 7 (and the form and requirements of the Disclosure Information) may be
amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in
paragraph (c)(3) hereof) or the consent of the Owners of any Bonds, by a resolution of the City
Council filed in the office of the City Clerk of the City accompanied by an opinion of Bond
Counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City and others and the opinion may be subject to
customary qualifications, to the effect that: (i) such amendment or supplement (a) is made in
connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or regulation or a
change in the identity, nature or status of the City or the type of operations conducted by the
City, or (b) is required by, or better complies with, the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule;
-20-
(ii) this Section 7 as so amended or supplemented would have complied with the requirements of
paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule at the time of the primary offering of the Bonds, giving effect to any
change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that the Rule as in effect
and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the
primary offering; and (iii) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the
interests of the Bondowners under the Rule. .
If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide,
contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the reasons for
the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or
operating data being provided hereunder.
(3) This Section 7 is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of
the Rule and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of the
Rule.
Attest:
City Clerk
-21-
Mayor
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
Councilmember and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in
favor thereof: __ . ___ ____
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and - adopted, and was signed by the Mayor
which signature was attested by the City Clerk.
-22-
CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO
$ GENERAL OBLIGATION
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1999B
Issuer: City of Edina, Minnesota
Governing body: City Council
Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on May 3, 1999, at
7:00 o'clock P.M., at the Edina City Hall.
Members present:
Members absent:
Documents attached:
Minutes of said meeting including (pages): 1 through 21
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $ GENERAL OBLIGATION
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1999B; AWARDING THE SALE,
FIXING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE
EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF AND SECURITY
THEREFOR
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the
public corporation issuing the obligations referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the
documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original
records of the corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that the
documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing
body of the corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions
taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at the meeting, insofar as they relate
to the obligations; and that the meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and
place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice
given as required by law.
WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this day of
'1999.
Debra Mangen, City Clerk
It was reported that (L) proposals had been received prior to 10:30
A.M., Central Time today for the purchase of the $ General Obligation Refunding
Bonds, Series 1999B. of the -City in accordance with the Official Statement distributed by. the City,
to potential purchasers of the Bonds. The proposals have been read and tabulated, and the terms
of each have been determined to be as follows:
Bid for Interest Net Interest
Name of Bidder Principal Rates Cost
[See attached].
0
Councilmember then introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $ GENERAL OBLIGATION
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 199913; AWARDING THE SALE,
FIXING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE
EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF AND SECURITY
THEREFOR
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of Edina,
Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. Authorization and Sale of Bonds.
1.01. Authorization and Outstanding Bonds. The City has presently outstanding
its General Obligation Recreational Facility Bonds, Series 1992A, initially dated as of
November 1, 1992 (the "Prior Bonds "). This Council, by a resolution adopted on April 5, 1999,
authorized the sale of General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1999B (the "Bonds "), of the
City, the proceeds of which would be used, together with any additional funds of the Issuer
which might be required, to refund in advance of maturity the Prior Bonds maturing in the years
2003 through 2013 which aggregate $3,215,000 in principal amount (the "Refunded Bonds ").
Said refunding constitutes a "crossover refunding" as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section
475.17, subd. 13. The Prior Bonds were issued pursuant to Minnesota Laws 1961, Chapter 655
(the "Act ") and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 to finance the acquisition and betterment of
certain improvements to the municipal recreational facilities of the City. The Bonds shall be
payable primarily out of the net revenues (the "Net Revenues ") to be derived from the municipal
golf courses, ice arena and liquor stores of the City. There is currently payable out of all or a
portion of the Net Revenues, the Prior Bonds and the General Obligation Recreational Facility
Refunding Bonds, Series 1992C (the "1992C Bonds ") of the City.
1.02. Findings. It is hereby found, determined and declared'that the Net
Revenues in the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998 totaled $ , which amount
exceeds the maximum amount of principal and interest to become due in any future fiscal year on
the Bonds, the Prior Bonds and the 1992C Bonds, as adjusted to reflect the redemption of the
Refunded Bonds from the proceeds 'of the Bonds and the payment of interest on the Bonds from
proceeds of the Bonds until applied to refund the Refunded Bonds. It is hereby determined that
the estimated Net Revenues will be sufficient, together with the other sources pledged to the
payment thereof, to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds, the Prior Bonds and the
1992C Bonds when due.
1.03. Sale of Bonds. The City has retained Springsted Incorporated, an
independent financial advisor, to assist the City in connection with the sale of the Bonds. The
Bonds are being sold pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph
.f
(9), without meeting the requirements for public sale under Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60,
Subdivision 1. Pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of Sale for the Bonds, (_)
proposals for the purchase of the. Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt
of proposals. The proposals have been publicly read and considered, and the purchase price,
interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The
most favorable proposal received is that of , of ,
, and associates (the "Purchaser "), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ ,
the Bonds to bear interest at the rates set forth in Section 3.01. The proposal is hereby accepted,
and the Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on
the part of the City for the sale of the Bonds with the Purchaser. The good faith checks of the
unsuccessful bidders shall be returned forthwith...
1.04. Performance of Requirements. The City is authorized by the Act to issue
and sell the Bonds to secure the Bonds by the covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth. All
acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of
Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid
issuance of the Bonds having,been done, existing, having happened and having been performed,
it is now necessary for this Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide
security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith.
Section 2. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the
following form:
-2-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF EDINA
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BOND,
SERIES 1999B
Date of
Interest Rate Maturily Original Issue CUSIP
% January 1, May 1, 1999
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: DOLLARS
THE CITY OF EDINA, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City"), acknowledges
itself to be indebted and, for value received, hereby promises to pay to the registered owner
named above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above, on the maturity date
specified above, with interest thereon from the date of original issue specified above, or from the
most recent interest payment date to which interest has been paid or duly provided for, at the
annual rate specified above. Interest hereon is payable on January 1 and July 1 in each year,
commencing January 1, 2000, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of
business on the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month, all
subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this
Bond before maturity. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof at the
office of the City Finance Director, in Edina, Minnesota, as Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying
Agent (the "Bond Registrar "), or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein,
the principal hereof, are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or
draft of the City or the Bond Registrar if a successor to the City Finance Director as Bond
Registrar has been designated under the Resolution described herein.
This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $
(the `Bonds ") all of like date and tenor except as to serial number, interest rate, redemption
privilege and maturity date, issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on
May 3, 1999 (the "Resolution "), for the purpose of refunding certain of the City's outstanding
-3-
general obligation bonds and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the provisions of
the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota
Laws 1961, Chapter 655, and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475. This Bond is payable primarily
from the net revenues of the golf courses, ice arena and liquor stores of the City pledged to the
payment of the Bonds by the Resolution, but the City is required by law to pay maturing principal
hereof and interest thereon out of any funds of the City if net revenues are insufficient therefor.
The Bonds are issuable only as fully registered bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any multiple
thereof, of single maturities.
Bonds maturing in the years 2003 through 2009 are payable on their respective
stated maturity dates without option of prior payment, but Bonds having stated maturity.dates in
the years 2010 through 2013 are each subject to redemption and prepayment, at the option of the
City and in whole or in part, and if in part, in the maturities selected by the City and, within any
maturity, in $5,000 principal amounts selected by lot, on January 1, 2009 and on any date
thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus accrued interest to
the date of redemption.
At least thirty days prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond, notice of the
call for redemption will be mailed to the Bond Registrar and to the -registered owner of each
Bond to be redeemed at his address appearing in the Bond Register, but no defect in or failure to
give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of the proceedings for the
redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption
having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of the Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on
the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price herein specified and from
and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such
Bond or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon the partial redemption of any Bond,
a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the registered owner without charge, representing the
remaining principal amount outstanding.
As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein,
this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar,
by the registered owner hereof in person or by his attorney duly authorized in writing upon
surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar,
duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange
for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange, the City will
cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the
same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same
date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with
respect to such transfer or exchange.
The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name
this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the
-4-
purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond
Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that
all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to
be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond in
order to make this Bond a valid and binding general obligation of the City according to its terms,
have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed in regular and due form as so
required; that in and by the Resolution, the City has pledged to the payment of the principal of
and interest on the Bonds so much of the net revenues of the City's golf courses, ice arena and
liquor stores as shall be required to pay such principal and interest and on a parity with the pledge
of such net revenues to the payment of other outstanding bonds of the City; if needed to pay the
principal and interest on this Bond, ad valorem taxes will be levied upon all taxable property in
the City without limitation as to rate or amount; and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause
the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation.
This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled
to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall
have been executed by the Bond Registrar by the manual signature of the Bond Registrar, or in
the event the City Finance Director is no longer acting as Bond Registrar, one of the authorized
representatives of the Bond Registrar.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its
City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed by the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and
the City Manager and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below.
Date of Authentication:
City Manager
CITY OF EDINA
-5-
Mayor
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within.
LM
City Finance Director, as Bond Registrar
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this
Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or
regulations:
TEN COM — — as tenants
in common
TEN ENT — — as tenants
by the entireties
JT TEN — — as joint tenants
with right of .
survivorship and
not as tenants in
common
UNIF TRANS MIN ACT....... Custodian ....... .
(Cust) (Minor)
under Uniform Transfers to Minors
Act......................
(State)
Additional abbreviations may also be used.
0
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers
unto the
within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints
attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books
kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises.
Dated:
PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY
OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER
OF ASSIGNEE:
Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an
"eligible guarantor institution"
meeting the requirements of the
Bond Registrar, which requirements
include membership or participation
in the Securities Transfer Association
Medalion Program (STAMP) or such
other "signature guaranty program"
as may be determined by the Bond
Registrar in addition to or in
substitution for STAMP, all in
accordance with the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
NOTICE: The signature(s) to
this assignment must correspond with the name
as it appears upon the face of
the within Bond in every particular,
without alteration, enlargement
or any change whatsoever.
Section 3. Bond Terms, Execution and Delivery.
3.01. Maturities, Interest Rates, Denominations, Payment, Dating of Bonds. The
City shall forthwith issue and deliver the Bonds, which shall be denominated "General
Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1999B." The Bonds shall be dated as of May 1, 1999, shall
be issuable in the denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, shall mature on
January 1 in the years and amounts set forth below, and Bonds maturing in such years and
-7-
amounts shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the rates
per annum set forth opposite such years and amounts as follows:
Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Amount Rate
Year Amount Rate
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form, of single maturities.
The interest thereon. and, upon surrender of each Bond at the principal office of the Registrar
described herein, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the
Registrar. Each Bond shall. be dated by the Registrar as of the date of its authentication.
3.02. Interest Payment Dates. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on January 1
and July 1 in each year, commencing January 1, 2000, to the owners thereof as such appear of
record in the bond register as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately
preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. Interest on the Bonds will be
computed on the basis of a 360 -day year consisting of twelve 30 -day months and will be rounded
pursuant to the rules of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.
-- -- - - - - - `3:03. Registration. -The City shall appoint, and shall-maintain, a -bond registrar,
transfer agent and paying agent (the Registrar). The effect of registration and the rights and
duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows:
(a) Re ister. The Registrar shall keep at its principal office a bond register in
which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the
registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or
exchanged.
-= - - -(b) -Transfer -of Bonds. -Upon- surrender to -the Registrar for transfer of any Bond
duly endorsed by, the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of
transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner
thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing; the Registrar
shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one
or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the
transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer
after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such
interest payment date.
91
(c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bond is surrendered by the registered
owner for exchange, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds
of alike aggregate principal amount, interest rate and maturity, as requested by the
registered owner or the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing.
(d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange shall be
promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the
Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that
.the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument.of transfer is validand genuine and
that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for
its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, 'in its judgment, deems improper or
unauthorized.
(f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner
of such Bond, whether such Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving
payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Bond and for all other
purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the
owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the City
upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds (except for
an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge
upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other
governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such tr ansfer or exchange.
(h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become
mutilated or be lost, stolen or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like
amount, number, interest rate, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for
and upon cancellation of any such,mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any
such Bond lost, stolen or destroyed, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and
charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond lost, stolen or
destroyed, upon receipt by the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Bond was
lost, stolen or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon receipt by the Registrar
of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in
which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds: so
surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation
shall be given to the City. If the mutilated, lost, stolen or'destroyed Bond has already
matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be
necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment.
0
3.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints the City
Finance Director, as the initial Registrar. In the event that the City determines to discontinue the
book entry-only system for the Bonds as described in paragraph (c) of Section 3.07, or DTC, as
defined in Section 107, determines to discontinue providing its services with respect to the
Bonds and a new securities depository is not appointed for the Bonds, the City will designate a
suitable bank or trust company to act as successor Registrar if the City Finance Director is then
acting as Registrar. The City reserves the right to remove any Registrar upon thirty (30) days'
notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor
Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar.
3.05. Redemption.. Bonds maturing in the years 2003 through 2009 are payable
on their respective stated maturity dates without option of prior payment, but Bonds maturing in
2010 through 2013 are each subject to redemption, at the option of the City and in whole or in
part, and if in part, in the maturities selected by the City and, within any maturity, in $5,000
principal amounts selected by the Registrar by lot, on January 1, 2009 and on any date thereafter,
at a redemption price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus accrued interest
to the date of redemption.
At least thirty days prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond, the City shall
cause notice of the call for redemption to be mailed to the Registrar and to the registered owner
of each Bond to be redeemed, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption
shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such
defect or failure. The notice of redemption shall specify the redemption date, redemption price,
the numbers, interest rates and CUSIP numbers of the Bonds to be redeemed and the place at
which the Bonds are to be surrendered for payment, which is the principal office of the Registrar.
Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions thereof so to
be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price
therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the
redemption price) such Bonds or portions thereof shall cease to bear interest.
Bonds in a denomination larger than $5,000 may be redeemed in part in any
integral multiple of $5,000. The owner of any Bond redeemed in part shall receive without
charge, upon surrender of such Bond to the Registrar, one or more new Bonds in authorized
denominations equal in principal amount to be unredeemed portion of the Bond so surrendered.
3.06. Preparation and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction
of the City Manager and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor
and the City Manager; provided that said signatures may be printed, engraved, or lithographed
facsimiles thereof. In case any officer whose signature, or a facsimile of whose signature, shall
appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such
signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if
such officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond
-10-
shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this
Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on such Bond has been duly executed
by the manual signature of the Registrar, or in the event the City Finance Director is no longer
acting as Registrar, an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication
on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of
authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and
delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have been so executed and authenticated, they
shall be delivered by the City Manager to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in
accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser shall not be
obligated to see to the application of the purchase price.
3.07. Securities Depository. (a) For purposes of this Section the following terms
shall have the following meanings:
"Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person
in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on
the records of such Participant, or such person's subrogee.
"Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor
nominee of DTC with respect to the Bonds.
"DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York.
"Participant" shall mean any broker - dealer, bank or other financial institution for
which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository.
"Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter from the City to
DTC previously executed by the City and on file with DTC.
(b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered
bonds, and one Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds.
Upon initial issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the bond register in the
name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. The Registrar and the City may treat DTC (or its
nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of
payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereof to be
redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of
Bonds under this resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes
whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
Neither the Registrar nor the City shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant,
any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any
Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the bond register as being a registered
owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any
-11-
Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to
the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or required
to be given to owners of Bonds under this resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC or any
Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of the Bonds, or
with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Bonds.
So long as any Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the Registrar
shall pay all principal of and interest on such Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to such
Bond, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with the Representation Letter, and all such payments
shall.be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to the
principal of and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other
than DTC shall.receive an authenticated Bond for each separate stated maturity evidencing the
obligation of the City to make payments of principal and interest. Upon delivery by DTC to the
Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in
place of Cede & Co., the Bonds will be transferable to such new nominee in accordance with
paragraph (d) hereof.
(c) In the event the City determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial
Owners that they be able to obtain Bonds in the form of bond certificates, the City may notify
DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants of the availability through
DTC of Bonds in the form of certificates. In such event, the Bonds will be transferable in
accordance with paragraph (d) hereof. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services
with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and the Registrar and
discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event the
Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (d) hereof.
(d) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under
paragraph (b) or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the
Registrar of the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to
the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. In the event Bonds
in the form of certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee
for DTC as owner of all the Bonds, or another securities depository as owner of all the Bonds, the
provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without
limitation, the printing of such Bonds in the form of bond certificates and the method of payment
of principal of and - interest on such Bonds in the -form of bond certificates.- -
Section 4. Security Provisions.
4.01. Use of Proceeds. There is hereby established as a separate account known
as the "Escrow Account" in the 1999B Refunding Bond Fund referred to in Section 4.02 hereof.
The proceeds of the Bonds in the amount of $ shall be deposited into the Escrow
Account and are irrevocably appropriated for the payment of interest to become due on the Bonds
to and including January 1, 2002 (the "Crossover Date "), and for the payment and redemption of
-12-
the principal amount of the Refunded Bonds on the Crossover Date. The City Finance Director
is hereby authorized and directed, simultaneously with the delivery of the Bonds, to deposit the
proceeds of the Bonds in the Escrow Account, in escrow with ,
in 9 , a banking institution whose deposits are insured by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation and whose combined capital and surplus is not less than
$500,000, and shall invest the funds so deposited in securities authorized for such purpose by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67, subdivision 8, maturing on such dates and bearing interest at
such rates as are required to provide funds sufficient, with cash retained in the escrow account, to
make the above - described payments. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to
enter into an escrow agreement with said Bank establishing the terms and conditions for the
escrow account in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67. Of the remaining
proceeds of the Bonds, $ shall be applied to pay issuance expenses and $ ,
together with accrued interest on the Bonds, if any, shall be deposited in the 1999B Refunding
Bond Fund referred to Section 4.05 hereof.
4.02. 1999 Utilities Bond Fund. So long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and
any principal of or interest thereon unpaid, the City Finance Director shall maintain on its books
and records a separate and special bookkeeping fund designated "1999B Refunding Bond Fund"
(the "Bond Fund ") to be used for no purpose other than the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Bonds. The City hereby appropriates to the Bond Fund the accrued interest on the
Bonds any amounts transferred to the Bond Fund pursuant to Section 4.01 hereof. The City
Finance Director shall deposit in the Bond Fund the proceeds of all taxes levied and all other
money which may at any time be received for or appropriated to the payment of such bonds and
interest, including the Net Revenues herein pledged and appropriated to the Bond Fund, all
collections of any ad valorem taxes levied for the payment of the Bonds, and all other moneys
received for or appropriated to the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon. On January 1,
2002 the sum of $ from Net Revenues shall be credited to a separate account in the
Bond Fund as a reserve for the Bonds as required by the Act, which amount equals the average
amount of principal and interest to become due on the Bonds and is required to be deposited
therein pursuant to the Act.
4.03. Pledge of Net Revenues. The Net Revenues are hereby irrevocably pledged
and appropriated to the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon when due and the maintenance
of the reserve account required by the Act. The pledge of the Net Revenues to the payment of the
Bonds and maintenance of the reserve account is subordinate to the pledge of the Net Revenues
to the payment of the Prior Bonds and on a parity with the pledge of such net revenues to the
payment of the 1992C Bonds. Nothing herein shall preclude the City from hereafter making
further pledges and appropriations of the Net Revenues for payment of additional obligations of
the City hereafter authorized if the Council determines before the authorization of such additional
obligations that the estimated Net Revenues will be sufficient, together with any other sources
pledged to the payment of the outstanding and additional obligations, for payment of the
outstanding bonds and such additional obligations. Such further pledges and appropriations of
-13-
Net Revenues may be made superior or subordinate to, or on a parity with, the pledge and
appropriation herein made.
4.04. Full Faith and Credit Pledged. The full faith and credit of the City are
irrevocably_ pledged -for the prompt and full payment of the - principal of and the interest on the
Bonds, as such principal and interest comes due. If the money on hand in the Bond Fund should
at any time be insufficient for the payment of principal and interest then due, this City shall pay
the principal and interest out of any fund of the City, and such other fund or funds shall be
reimbursed therefor when sufficient money is available to the Bond Fund. If on October 1 in any
year the sum of the balance in the Bond Fund plus the available Net Revenues on hand and
estimated to-be received or before the end of the following calendar year is not sufficient with
any ad valorem taxes heretofore levied in accordance with the provisions of this resolution, to
pay when due all principal and interest become due on all Bonds payable therefrom in said
following calendar year, or the Bond Fund has incurred a deficiency in the manner provided in
this Section 4.04, a direct,'irrepealable, ad valorem tax shall be levied on all taxable property
within the corporate limits of the City for the purpose of restoring such accumulated or
anticipated deficiency in an amount at least 5% in excess of amount needed to make good the
deficiency.
Section 5. Defeasance. When any Bond has been discharged as provided in this
Section 5, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of such
Bonds shall cease, and such Bonds shall no longer be deemed outstanding under this Resolution.
The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bond which is due on any date by
irrevocably depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment
- thereof in -full; or,,, if any Bond - should not -be paid when due, -the- City -- may - nevertheless discharge
its obligations with respect thereto by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the
payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit. The City may also, at
any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now
or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a
bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized
by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing
on such dates as shall be required, without reinvestment, to pay all principal and interest to
- become -due thereon to maturity or, if notice of redemption as herein required has been duly
provided for, to such earlier. redemption date._ _
Section 6. County Auditor Registration, Certification of Proceedings, Investment
of Money Arbitrage Official Statement and Fees.
6.01. County Auditor Registration. The City Manager is hereby authorized and
directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor of Hennepin County,
together with such other information as the County Auditor shall require, and to obtain from said
-14-
County Auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been entered on his bond register as required by
law.
6.02. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the City and the County
Auditor of Hennepin County are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the
Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel to the City, certified copies of all
proceedings and records of the City, and such other affidavits, certificates and information as
may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as the
same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known
to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore
furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the facts recited therein.
6.03. Covenant. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to
time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or
agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation
under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code "), and Regulations
promulgated thereunder (the Regulations), as such are enacted or promulgated and in effect on
the date of issue of the Bonds, and covenants to take any and all actions within its powers to
ensure that the interest on the Bonds will not become subject to taxation under such Code and
Regulations. The improvements financed by the Prior Bonds are public recreational facilities
available for use by members of the general public on a substantially equal basis. The City will
not enter into any lease, use agreement or other contract respecting the improvements financed by
the Prior Bonds or security for the payment of the Bonds which would cause the Bonds to be
considered "private activity bonds" or "private loan bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of the Code.
6.04. Arbitrage Rebate. The City shall take such actions as are required to
comply with the arbitrage rebate requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of Section 148(f) of the
Code.
6.05. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and the City Manager, being the
officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this
resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certification in
accordance with the provisions of Section 148 of the Code, and the Regulations, stating the facts,
estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Bonds which
make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Bonds -will not be used in a manner that
would cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of the Code and Regulations.
6.06. Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, dated
April 21, 1999, prepared and distributed on behalf of the City by Springsted Incorporated, is
hereby approved. Springsted Incorporated is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare
and distribute to the Purchaser a supplement to the Official Statement listing the offering price,
the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the underwriters and such other
-15-
information relating to the Certificates required to be included in the Official Statement by Rule
1'5c2 -12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934. Within seven business days from the date hereof, the City shall deliver to the Purchaser
a reasonable number of copies of the Official Statement and such supplement. The officers of
the City are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate
concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement.
Section 7. Continuing Disclosure.
(a) Purpose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public availability of certain
information relating to the Bonds and the security therefor and to permit the original purchaser
and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with
amendments to Rule 15c2 -12 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"SEC ") under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.R. § 240.15c2 =12), relating to
continuing disclosure (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, the "Rule "), which will
enhance the marketability of the Bonds, the City hereby makes the following covenants and
agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time of the
Outstanding Bonds. The City is the only "obligated person" in respect of the Bonds within the
meaning of the Rule for purposes of identifying the entities in respect of which continuing
disclosure must be made.
If the City fails to comply with any provisions of this Section 7, any person
aggrieved thereby, including the Owners of any Outstanding Bonds, may take whatever action at
law or in equity may appear necessary or appropriate to enforce performance and observance of
any - agreement -or covenant - contained in this Section 7, including an action for a writ of
mandamus or specific performance. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall
not be recoverable for any default hereunder to the extent permitted by law. Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary contained herein, in no event shall a default under this Section 7
constitute a default under the Bonds or under any other provision of this resolution.
As used in this Section 7, "Owner" or "Bondowner" means, in respect of a Bond,
the registered owner or owners thereof appearing in the bond register maintained by the Registrar
or any `Beneficial Owner" (as hereinafter defined) thereof, if such Beneficial Owner provides to
the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and substance reasonably
satisfactory to the Registrar. As used herein, `Beneficial Owner" means, in respect of a Bond,
any person or entity which (i) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect
to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bond (including persons or entities holding Bonds
through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of the
Bond for federal income tax purposes. As used herein, "Outstanding" when used as of any
particular time with reference to Bonds means all Bonds theretofore, or thereupon being,
authenticated and delivered by the Registrar under this Resolution except (i) Bonds theretofore
canceled by the Registrar or surrendered to the Registrar for cancellation; (ii) Bonds with respect
SM
to which the liability of the City has been discharged in accordance with Section 5 hereof; and
(iii) Bonds for the transfer or exchange or in lieu of or in substitution for which other Bonds shall
have been authenticated and delivered by the Registrar pursuant to this Resolution.
(b) Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth
in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the
following information at the following times:
(1) on or before 365 days after the end of each fiscal year of the City,
commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 1999 the following financial information
and operating data in respect of the City (the "Disclosure Information "):
(A) the audited financial statements of the City for such fiscal year,
accompanied by the audit report and opinion of the accountant or government
auditor relating thereto, as permitted or required by the laws of the State of
Minnesota, containing balance sheets as of the end of such fiscal year and a
statement of operations, changes in fund balances and cash flows for the fiscal
year then ended, showing in comparative form such figures for the preceding
fiscal year of the City, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board as modified
in accordance with the governmental accounting standards promulgated by the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board or as otherwise provided under
Minnesota law, as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such
financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such generally
accepted accounting principles for reasons beyond the reasonable control of the
City, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof, and certified as to
accuracy and completeness in all material respects by the fiscal officer of the City;
and
(B) To the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in
paragraph (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year or for the period most
recently available of the type set forth below, which information may be
unaudited, but is to be certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material
respects by the City's financial officer to the best of his or her knowledge, which
- certification may be based on the reliability of information obtained from
governmental or third party sources:
Most recent population estimate; City Property Values; City
Indebtedness; City Tax Rates; Levies and Collections; and Current
General Fund Budget
Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are
not available by the date specified, the City shall provide on or before such date unaudited
-17-
financial statements in the format required for the audited financial statements as part of the
Disclosure Information and, within 10 days after the receipt thereof, the City shall provide the
audited financial statements.
Any or all of the Disclosure Information may be incorporated by reference, if it is
updated as required hereby, from other documents, including official statements, which have
been submitted to each of the repositories hereinafter referred to under subsection (b) or the SEC.
If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from
the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City shall clearly identify in the Disclosure
Information each document so incorporated by reference.
If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the
operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure
Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a
statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City
operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City
determines that certain specified, data regarding such replacement operations would be a Material
Fact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure
Information shall include such additional specified data regarding the replacement operations.
If the Disclosure Information is changed or this Section 7 is amended as permitted
by this paragraph (b)(1) or subsection (d), then the City shall include in the next Disclosure
Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for
the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operating data
provided.
(2) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events
which is a Material Fact (as hereinafter defined):
(A) Principal and interest payment delinquencies;
(B) Non - payment related defaults;
(C) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial
difficulties;
(D) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial
difficulties;
(E) Substitution of creditor liquidity providers, or their failure to perform;
(F) Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax- exempt status of the
security;
(G) Modifications to rights'of security holders;
(Ii) Bond calls;
(I) Defeasances;
(J) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the
securities; and
(K) Rating changes.
-18-
As used herein, a "Material Fact" is a fact as to which a substantial likelihood exists that a
reasonably prudent investor would attach importance thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell a
Bond or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter the total information otherwise available to an
investor from the Official Statement, information disclosed hereunder or information generally
available to the public. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a "Material Fact" is also an
event that would be deemed "material" for purposes of the purchase, holding or sale of a Bond
within the meaning of applicable federal securities laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of
the occurrence of the event.
(3) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events or
conditions:
(A) the failure of the City to provide the Disclosure Information required
under paragraph (b)(1) at the time specified thereunder;
(B) the amendment or supplementing of this Section 7 pursuant to
subsection (d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any
explanation provided by the City under subsection (d)(2);
(C) the termination of the obligations of the City under this Section 7
pursuant to subsection (d);
(D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial
statements constituting a portion of the Disclosure Information are prepared; and
(E) any change in the fiscal year of the City.
(c) Manner of Disclosure. The City agrees to make available the information described
in subsection (b) to the following entities by telecopy, overnight delivery, mail or other means, as
appropriate:
(1) the information described in paragraph (1) of subsection (b), to each then nationally
recognized municipal securities information repository under the Rule and to any state
information depository then designated or operated by the State of Minnesota as contemplated by
the Rule (the "State Depository"), if any;
(2) the information described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b), to the
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and to the State Depository, if any; and
(3) the information described in subsection (b), to any rating agency then maintaining a
rating of the Bonds and, at the expense of such Bondowner, to any Bondowner who requests in
writing such information, at the time of transmission under paragraphs (1) or (2) of this
subsection (c), as the case may be, or, if such information is transmitted with a subsequent time
of release, at the time such information is to be released.
-19-
(d) Term; Amendments; Interpretation.
(1) The covenants of the City in this Section 7 shall remain in effect so long as any
Bonds are Outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the
City under-this Section-7 shall -terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the
City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that, because of legislative .
action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply
with the requirements of this Section 7 will not cause participating underwriters in the primary
offering of the Bonds to be in violation of the Rule or other applicable requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or
- amendatory thereof. _ . _
(2) This Section 7 (and the form and requirements of the Disclosure Information) may be
amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in
paragraph (c)(3) hereof) or the consent of the Owners of any Bonds, by a resolution of the City
Council filed in the office of the City Clerk of the City accompanied by an opinion of Bond
Counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City and others and the opinion may be subject to
customary qualifications, to the effect that: (i) such amendment or supplement (a) is made in
connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or regulation or a
change in the identity, nature or status of the City or the type of operations conducted by the
City, or (b) is required by, or better complies with, the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule;
(ii) this Section 7 as so amended or supplemented would have complied with the requirements of
paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule at the time of the primary offering of the Bonds, giving effect to any
change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that the Rule as in effect
_and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the
primary offering; and (iii) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the
interests of the Bondowners under the Rule.
If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide,
contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment; an explanation of the reasons for
the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or
operating data -being provided hereunder.
-20-
(3) This Section 7 is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of
the Rule and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of the
Rule.
Attest:
Mayor
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
Councilmember , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor
which signature was attested by the City Clerk.
-21-
w
COUNCIL
CHECr, REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 1
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199184
05/03/99
$110.00
A -1 ROOTMASTER
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10011208
BUILDING MAINT
CONTR REPAIRS.
< *>
$110.00*
199185
05/03/99
$21.65
AAA Credit Screening
Ser
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
4801
POLICE DEPT. G
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$21.65*
199186
05/03/99
$119.04
Aasen, Laurie
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE
042699
GOLF ADMINISTR
MILEAGE
< *>
$119.04*
199187
05/03/99
$160.66
ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
49502
SEWER CLEANING
CONTR REPAIRS
1546
< *>
$160.66*
199188
05/03/99
$380.25
Accountemps
Temp help
00329447
FINANCE
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$380.25*
199189
05/03/99
$102.13
ACE SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
215551
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPLI
2121.
< *>
$102.13*
199190
05/03/99
$35.42
ADAMS, RITA K.
Phone
041399
GENERAL FD PRO
AMBULANCE FEES
< *>
$35.42*
199191
05/03/99
$96.85
Adams
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
90021585
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
2388
< *>
$96.85*
199192
05/03/99
$177.20
Advantage Air Inc
Job canceled
96002936
GENERAL FD PRO
BUILDING PERMI
< *>
$177.20*
199193
05/03/99
$170.00
Aearo Co
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
03703889
PUMP & LIEN ST
SAFETY EQUIPME
2358
05/03/99
- $30.00
Aearo Co
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
01165539
PUMP & LIFT ST
SAFETY EQUIPME
2376
05/03/99
- $85.00
Aearo Co
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
01165540
PUMP & LIFT ST
SAFETY EQUIPME
< *>
$55.00*
199195
05/03/99
$62.03
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
ADMINISTRATION
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$207.48
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
ENGINEERING GE
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$146.10
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
SUPERV. & OVRH
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$340.13
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
FIRE DEPT. GEN
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$7.09
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
PUBLIC HEALTH
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$143.24
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
INSPECTIONS
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$102.57
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
PARK ADMIN.
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$112.58
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
PARK MAINTENAN
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$27.12
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
TREES & MAINTE
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$5.92
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
CLUB HOUSE
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$147.37
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
DISTRIBUTION
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$453.42
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
PATROL
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$29.80
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
TELEPHONE
041099
INVESTIGATION
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$35.46
Airtouch Cellular
Bellev
GENERAL SUPPLIES
041099
ANIMAL CONTROL
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$1,820.31*
199196
05/03/99
$146.00
All Saints Brands
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
9424
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$136.05
All Saints Brands
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
11557
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$382.00
All Saints Brands
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
11592
VERNON.SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
< *>
$664.05*
199197
05/03/99
$109.80
Allstar Construction
Job canceled
9800248.4
GENERAL FD PRO
BUILDING PERMI
< *>
$109.80*
_
OUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 2
HECK NO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
199198
05/03/99
$789.00
ALSTAD, MARIAN
Ac service
042399
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$789.00*
199199
05/03/99
$215.97
AMERICAN SERVICES CORP
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
004067
VERNON OCCUPAN
CONTR REPAIRS
05/03/99
$145.56
AMERICAN SERVICES CORP
Contracted repairs
004068
50TH ST OCCUPA
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$361.53*
199200
05/03/99
$87.38
Ancel, Lynette
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
041999
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$87.38*
199201
05/03/99
$1,441:25
ANCHOR PAPER
GENERAL SUPPLIES
11563530
CENT SVC GENER
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$95.13
ANCHOR PAPER
GENERAL SUPPLIES
11563720
CENT SVC GENER
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$1,536.38*
199202
05/03/99
$58.63
ANDERSON, TOM
GENERAL SUPPLIES
041399
RANGE
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$36.27
ANDERSON, TOM
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE
041499
GOLF ADMINISTR
MILEAGE
< *>
$94.90*
199203
05/03/99
$363.95
ApexII
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
99245600
ASSESSING
DUES & SUBSCRI
2319
< *>
$363.95*
199204
05/03/99
$287.71
AQUA ENGINEERING
GENERAL SUPPLIES
037142
SNOW & ICE REM
GENERAL SUPPLI
2266
< *>
$287.71*
199205
05/03/99
$560.00
ASCAP
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
042099
ARENA ADMINIST
DUES & SUBSCRI
< *>
$560.00*
199206
05/03/99
$231.70
AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES
TELEPHONE
041699
INVESTIGATION
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$19.80
AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES
TELEPHONE
041699
CLUB HOUSE
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$89.60
AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES
TELEPHONE
041699
FRED RICHARDS
TELEPHONE
< *>
$341.10*
199207
05/03/99
$5.47
AT &T
TELEPHONE
033199
CENT SVC GENER
TELEPHONE
< *>
$5.47*
199208
05/03/99
$1.91
AT &T
TELEPHONE
041899
ADMINISTRATION
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$0.95
AT &T
TELEPHONE
041899
ENGINEERING GE
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$0.32
AT &T
TELEPHONE
041899
FIRE DEPT. GEN
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$4.76
AT &T
TELEPHONE
041899
INSPECTIONS
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$16.52
AT &T
TELEPHONE
041899
PARK MAINTENAN
TELEPHONE
< *>
$24.46*
199209
05/03/99
$131.25
AUGIE'S INC.
COST OF GOODS SOLD
15238
FRED RICHARDS
COST OF GD SOL
9025
05/03/99
$43.53
AUGIE'S INC.
COST OF GOODS SOLD
15551
FRED RICHARDS
COST OF GD SOL
05/03/99
$28.47
AUGIE'S INC.
COST OF GOODS SOLD
15650
FRED RICHARDS
COST OF GD SOL
9025
< *>
$203.25*
199210
05/03/99
$129.50
BACON'S ELECTRIC CO
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
22950
PUMP & LIFT ST
CONTR REPAIRS
1547
< *>
$129.50*
199211
05/03/99
$111.97
Bags & Bows
GENERAL SUPPLIES
01978174
ART SUPPLY GIF
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$111.97*
199212
05/03/99
$4,186.04
BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
23273546
GENERAL STORM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$4,186.04*
COUNCIL CHEu- REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (�o:53) page 3
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199213
05/03/99
$353.55
Barreveld International
Displays
80066
PRO SHOP
GENERAL SUPPLI
9445
< *>
$353.55*
199214
05/03/99
$77.96
BATTERIES PLUS
Batteries
D117730
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
2086
05/03/99
$81.98
BATTERIES PLUS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
D118345
INSPECTIONS
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$184.49
BATTERIES PLUS
Batteries
D119247
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
1059
05/03/99
$18.09
BATTERIES PLUS
Cell phone cover
D119260
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
1059
< *>
$362.52*
199215
05/03/99
$357.39
Battery Wholesale Inc
GENERAL SUPPLIES
5781
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL SUPPLI
1745
05/03/99
$507.26
Battery Wholesale Inc
ACCESSORIES
5882
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2213
< *>
$864.65*
199216
05/03/99
$10.00
BEARMON, DIANA
Refund safety camp
041999
GENERAL FD PRO
REGISTRATION F
< *>
$10.00*
199217
05/03/99
$267.50
BELLBOY CORPORATION
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
16317700
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$507.80
BELLBOY CORPORATION
COST OF GOODS SOLD
LI
16321400
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQU
05/03/99
$94.42
BELLBOY CORPORATION
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
29555200
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$163.96
BELLBOY CORPORATION
RANGE BALLS
29558800
VERNON SELLING
RANGE BALLS
05/03/99
$382.50
BELLBOY CORPORATION
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
16360600
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$51.00
BELLBOY CORPORATION
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
16360700
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$686.45
BELLBOY CORPORATION
COST OF GOODS SOLD
LI
16360800
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD LIQU
05/03/99
$142.47
BELLBOY CORPORATION
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
29589200
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$19.76
BELLBOY CORPORATION
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
29589400
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
< *>
$2,315.86*
199218
05/03/99
$73.13
BENN, BRADLEY
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$73.13}
199219
05/03/99
$232.67
BERNHJELM, WILLIAM
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
042399
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$232.67*
199221
05/03/99
$118.62
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
OFFICE SUPPLIES
6429190
ART CENTER ADM
OFFICE SUPPLIE
1239
05/03/99
$22.00
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6481601
YORK OCCUPANCY
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$14.40
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6486750
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
- $29.81
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CM647709
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
-$5.73
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CM648332
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$36.86
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6498890
PW BUILDING
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$155.96
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
Stool
6507840
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL SUPPLI
2142
05/03/99
-$2.43
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CM649659
FINANCE
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$98.41
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6516090
PARK ADMIN.
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$5.89
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6516790
ENGINEERING GE
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$100.60
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6516790
CENT SVC GENER
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$16.74
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6516790
LIQUOR 50TH ST
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$22.18
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6516920
POOL OPERATION
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$12.72
BERTELSON BROS. INC..
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6517920
ADMINISTRATION
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$30.97
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6517920
PARK ADMIN.
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$16.69
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
REPAIR PARTS
6518030
PW BUILDING
REPAIR PARTS
05/03/99
$109.77
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
Hudson books, diskett
6518710
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPLI
1996
05/03/99
$14.70
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6520920
FINANCE
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$4.89
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
6520920
ENGINEERING GE
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$70.44
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
OFFICE SUPPLIES
6523200
POLICE DEPT. G
OFFICE SUPPLIE
05/03/99
-$2.43
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CM651679
FINANCE
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
-$4.89
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CM651679
ENGINEERING GE
GENERAL SUPPLI
=NCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -19.99 (18:53) page 4
HECK NO
DATE CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM.
=
----------------------------------------------
199221
05/03/99
. -$1.02
------------------=--------------------------------------------------
BERTELSON BROS. INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
CM651679
CENT SVC GENER
-----------
GENERAL SUPPLI
- -- - -
< *>
$805.53*
199222
05/03/99
$14.43
Best Access Systems of M
Keys
MN100806
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$14.43*
199223
05/03/99.
$99.01
BEST BUY COMPANY INC.
OFFICE SUPPLIES
00501174
LIQUOR YORK GE
OFFICE SUPPLIE
1931
< *>
$99.01*
199224
05/03/99
$97.31
Biffs Inc
RUBBISH REMOVAL
W57258
FRED RICHARDS
RUBBISH REMOVA
9027
< *>
$97.31*
199225
05/03/99
$102.75
BOYER TRUCKS
REPAIR PARTS
751355X1
EQUIPMENT OPER.REPAIR
PARTS
05/03/99
$45.57
BOYER TRUCKS
REPAIR PARTS
831270
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1736
05/03/99
- $54.32
BOYER TRUCKS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
832906
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL SUPPLI
1970
05/03/99
$355.31
BOYER TRUCKS
Mirror
833898
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2005
05/03/99
$19.06
BOYER TRUCKS
Oil clamp
837673
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS.
2207
05/03/99
$28.71
BOYER TRUCKS
REPAIR PARTS
839864
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2226
05/03/99
$278.96
BOYER TRUCKS
REPAIR PARTS
840990
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2234
< *>
$776.04*
199226
05/03/99
$6,511.00.
BRAUN INTERTEC
CONSTR. IN PROGRESS
115557
W 77TH ST PENT
CIP
< *>
$6,511.00*
199227
05/03/99
$937.20
BRENT'S SIGNS DISPLAY &
Signs
1028
RANGE
REPAIR PARTS
2384
05/03/99
$562.12
BRENT'S SIGNS DISPLAY &
GENERAL SUPPLIES
1036
RANGE
GENERAL SUPPLI
2386
< *>
$1,499.32*
199228
05/03/99
$370.00
BROADCAST MUSIC INC
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
681479
ED ADMINISTRAT
DUES & SUBSCRI
< *>
$370.00*
199229
05/03/99
$100.00
BROM, BECKY
Perform Edinborough
052799
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO SVC OTHER
<*>
$100.00*
199230
05/03/99
$638.95
BROWN, ANNE BROWNFIELD-
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
041699
POOL OPERATION
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$638.95*
199231
05/03/99
$147.92
BROWNELLS INC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
01360479
POLICE DEPT. G
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$147.92*
199232
05/03/99
$286.08
BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC
INFIELD MIXTURE
246246
FIELD MAINTENA
INFIELD MIX
< *>
$286.08*
199233
05/03/99
$134.13
BUD LARSON SALES
Brooms
36582
GENERAL MAINT
TOOLS
1885
< *>
$134.13*
199234
05/03/99
$40.00
CALHOUN ISLES COM BAND
Services Edinborough
051699
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$40.00*
199235
05/03/99
$235.10
Camas
Concrete
1086083
DISTRIBUTION
CONCRETE
1766
05/03/99
$852.27
Camas
Asphalt
1086084
DISTRIBUTION
CONCRETE
1766
< *>
$1,087.37*
199236
05/03/99
$45.50
CAMPE, HARRIET
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$45.50*
i
VV VL�\.1L l.L1L,V�l
\lJVIULY,I\
$87.33
< *>
$87.33*
-
05/03/99
$4,619.81
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR--------
-DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
-
- - -- PROGRAM, -- -
- - - -- _OBJECT - - - -
-PO -NUM
---------
199237
- - - - -- - - - --
05/03/99
- - - - - -
$198.64
-- - - --
-- - - - - -_
CAMPION CATERING
- - - - -- - - -
Planning meeting
- --
34620
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING EXPENS
2470
CATCO
05/03/99
$74.72
CAMPION CATERING
Dinner meeting
34715
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING EXPENS
2471
< *>
05/03/99
$273.36*
CATCO
05/03/99
$124.39
CATCO
05/03/99
$119.07
199238
05/03/99
$359.16
Capital Factors Inc
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 1513897
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6330
< *>
05/03/99
$359.16*
CATCO
05/03/99
$551.08
CATCO
05/03/99
$62.57
199239-
05/03/99
$87.33
< *>
REPAIR PARTS
$87.33*
199241
05/03/99
$4,619.81
CATCO
05/03/99
$146.63
CATCO
05/03/99
- $3.68
CATCO
05/03/99
$140.41
CATCO
05/03/99
$26.40
CATCO
05/03/99
- $53.25
CATCO
05/03/99
- $2,343.00
CATCO
05/03/99
- $41.54
CATCO
05/03/99
$201.80
CATCO
05/03/99
$33.64
CATCO
05/03/99
$32.27,
CATCO
05/03/99
$124.39
CATCO
05/03/99
$119.07
CATCO
05/03/99
$91.75
CATCO
05/03/99
$78.67
CATCO
05/03/99
- $142.71
CATCO
05/03/99
$14.95
CATCO
05/03/99
$551.08
CATCO
05/03/99
$62.57
CATCO
05/03/99
$14.97
CHAOUCH, HABIB
05/03/99
$420.69
CHAOUCH, HABIB
05/03/99
$286.38
< *>
$4,388:66*
199242
05/03/99
$295.00
05/03/99
$680.00
< *>
$975.00*
199243
05/03/99
$134.87
< *>
$134.87*
199244. 05/03/99
199245 05/03/99
199246 05/03/99
199247 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
< *>
CARLSON PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES 00071664 CENT SVC GENER GENERAL SUPPLI
CATCO
Trans
394876
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
396078
CATCO
Mounting kit
396079
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
396176
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
8113839
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
396502
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
396550
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
396556
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
396718
CATCO
Repair
397065
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
397122
CATCO
Air dryer kit
397400
CATCO
Air dryer kit
397450
CATCO
Shop parts
397817
CATCO
Shop parts
397937
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
398143
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
398183
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
398271
CATCO
REPAIR PARTS
398281
CATCO
Hose end
398397
CATCO
Shop parts
398404
CATCO
Shop parts
398587
CHAOUCH, HABIB
Soccer ref 59
games a 042499
CHAOUCH, HABIB
Soccer ref 40
games 042499
CHEMSEARCH GENERAL SUPPLIES 362045
i
$25.00 Christensen, Kathy
Refund tennis
042399
$25.00*
$6,500.00 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON
$6,500.00*
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 1183
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 1740
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 1738
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 1738
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2018
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2025
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2027
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2212
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2212
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2224
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2220
EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 2232
EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 2236
EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2236
GOLF DOME PROF SERVICES
GOLF DOME PROF SERVICES
GENERAL MAINT GENERAL SUPPLI
GENERAL FD PRO REGISTRATION F
Early childhood /pass 041599 PUBLIC HEALTH PROF SERVICES
$39,322.25
CITY OF
BLOOMINGTON
Joint powers
12831
PUBLIC HEALTH
PROF SERVICES
$39,322.25*
$108.11
CLAREYS
SAFETY EQUIP
Tire replace
47476
FIRE DEPT. GEN
EQUIP REPLACEM 7818
$346.74
CLAREYS
SAFETY EQUIP
Accident replacment
47397
FIRE DEPT. GEN
EQUIP REPLACEM 7818
$549.00
CLAREYS
SAFETY EQUIP
Hosebed divider
46266
FIRE DEPT. GEN
EQUIP REPLACEM 9957
$1,003.85*
OUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 6
'HECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199248
05/03/99
$50.00
Classic Golf Games
ADVERTISING OTHER
1601
PRO SHOP
ADVERT OTHER
< *>
$50.00*
199249
05/03/99
$103.43
Commercial Pool & Spa Su
CHEMICALS
95688
POOL TRACK GRE
CHEMICALS
< *>
$103.43*
199250
05/03/99
$373.46
COMPLETE BEVERAGE SERV
Annual meeting
21343
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING EXPENS
2403
< *>
$373.46*
199251
05/03/99
$411.84
COMPUSA INC
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
40106533
ADMINISTRATION
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$117.89
COMPUSA INC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
40106533
GOLF ADMINISTR
GENERAL SUPPLI
9590
05/03/99
$299.77
COMPUSA INC
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
40106678
ADMINISTRATION
EQUIP REPLACEM
1220
05/03/99
$325.90
COMPUSA INC
OFFICE SUPPLIES .40106894
ED ADMINISTRAT
OFFICE SUPPLIE
2139
< *>
$1,155.40*
199252
05/03/99
$78.77
COMPUTER CITY ACCOUNT RE
DATA PROCESSING
230584
POLICE DEPT. G
DATA PROCESSIN
05/03/99
$978.73-
COMPUTER CITY ACCOUNT RE
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
236523
MEDIA LAB
EQUIP REPLACEM
4819
05/03/99
$818.71
COMPUTER CITY ACCOUNT RE
EQUIPMENT.REPLACEMENT
240185
MEDIAILAB
EQUIP REPLACEM
5023
05/03/99
$121.41
COMPUTER CITY ACCOUNT RE
OFFICE SUPPLIES
248010
ED ADMINISTRAT
OFFICE SUPPLIE
05/03/99
$457.00
COMPUTER CITY ACCOUNT RE
CRAFT SUPPLIES
254967
ART CENTER ADM
CRAFT SUPPLIES
6151
05/03/99
$199.98
COMPUTER CITY ACCOUNT RE
COST OF GOODS SOLD
254967
MEDIA LAB
COST OF GD SOL
6151
05/03/99
$30.00
COMPUTER CITY ACCOUNT RE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
257002
MEDIA LAB
GENERAL SUPPLI
6151
< *>
$2,684.60*
199253
05/03/99
$2,245.00
Computerized Fleet Analy
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
19681
TRAINING
'CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$2,245.00*
199254.
05/03/99
$17.68
CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
00880960
GENERAL MAINT
SAFETY EQUIPME
05/03/99
$51.54
CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
00887716
GENERAL MAINT
SAFETY EQUIPME
< *>
$69.22*
199255
05/03/99
$529.25
Construction Bulletin Ma
Ads for bids
CB51872
ADMINISTRATION
ADVERTISING LE
< *>
$529.25*
199256
05/03/99
$150.00
CONTINUING EDUCATION /MPL
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
99095
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$150.00#
199257
05/03/99
$523.66
Corporate Portrait
Remodeling
.90101
CITY HALL
EQUIP REPLACEM
2404
< *>
$523.66*
199258
05/03/99
$25.00
Covan Worldwide Moving
GENERAL SUPPLIES
041999
POLICE DEPT. G
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$25.00*
199259
05/03/99
$304.29
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO.
REPAIR PARTS
102004
FIELD MAINTENA
REPAIR PARTS
1432
< *>
$304.29*
199260
05/03/99
$52.77
Cutter & Buck -
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
349817
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9427
< *>
$52.77*
199261
05/03/99
$519.99
CY'S UNIFORMS
Badges
0033489
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPLI
9948
< *>
$519.99*
199262
05/03/99
.$65.00
D.C. Appliance
Refrigerator removal
041699
HEALTH SP ASSM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$65.00*
199265 05/03/99
199266 05/03/99
199267 05/03/99
199268 05/03/99
199269 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
c *>
199270 05/03/99
05/03/99
199271 05/03/99
199272 .05/03/99
199274 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
$53.73
$53.73*
$1,693.00
$1,693.00*
$15,000.00
$15,000.00*
$371.05
$371.05*
$2,639.30
$318.19
$40.40
$758.85
$40.40
$1,285.65
$238.50
$1,001.70
$1,148.30
$32.00
$569.90
$8,073.19*
$24.01
$161.57
$185.58*
$5,039.49
$5,039.49*
$446.63
$446.63*
$100.27
$42.51
$47.47
$21.60
$52.06
$62.14
$56.13
$19.16
$39.18
$21.60
$41.89
$21.60
$45.00
DANS REGISTER SERVICE
V2 reg service
042299
VANVALKENBURG SAFETY EQUIPME
DAVID GEOFFREY & ASSOCIA
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 0884368
PRO SHOP COST OF GDS -PR 8027
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT PO NUM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199263
05/03/99
$297.44
DANIEL SMITH INC
COST OF GOODS SOLD
2252951
ART SUPPLY
GIF COST OF GD SOL 1791
< *>
COST
$297.44*
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
199264
05/03/99
$101.17
DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMEN
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
298594
FIRE DEPT.
GEN PROTECT CLOTHI
COST
05/03/99
$372.00
DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMEN
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
298595
FIRE DEPT.
GEN PROTECT CLOTHI
< *>
COST
$473.17*
GOODS
SOLD
14873
GRILL
COST
199265 05/03/99
199266 05/03/99
199267 05/03/99
199268 05/03/99
199269 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
c *>
199270 05/03/99
05/03/99
199271 05/03/99
199272 .05/03/99
199274 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
$53.73
$53.73*
$1,693.00
$1,693.00*
$15,000.00
$15,000.00*
$371.05
$371.05*
$2,639.30
$318.19
$40.40
$758.85
$40.40
$1,285.65
$238.50
$1,001.70
$1,148.30
$32.00
$569.90
$8,073.19*
$24.01
$161.57
$185.58*
$5,039.49
$5,039.49*
$446.63
$446.63*
$100.27
$42.51
$47.47
$21.60
$52.06
$62.14
$56.13
$19.16
$39.18
$21.60
$41.89
$21.60
$45.00
DANS REGISTER SERVICE
V2 reg service
042299
VANVALKENBURG SAFETY EQUIPME
DAVID GEOFFREY & ASSOCIA
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 0884368
PRO SHOP COST OF GDS -PR 8027
David Pinske Desigm & Bu
CDBG rehab
041299
CDBG PROG PROF SERVICES
Davis, Alcyone
Ambulance refund
981108
GENERAL FD PRO AMBULANCE FEES
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DAY DISTRIBUTING
DELEGARD TOOL CO.
DELEGARD TOOL CO.
DELTA DENTAL
DELTA FOREMOST CHEMICAL
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 57465
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 57938
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 58004
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 58132
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 58138
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 58139
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 58019
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 58496
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 58608
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 58608
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 58615
Tools
TOOLS
HOSPITALIZATION
Grill brite
YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BEE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MIX
YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BEE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BEE
YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MIX
VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
32265 EQUIPMENT OPER TOOLS 2012
44895 EQUIPMENT OPER TOOLS 2012
3182436 CENT SVC GENER HOSPITALIZATIO
654628 GRILL ADVERT PERSONL 2143
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
14782
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
14828
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
14844
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
14873
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
14904
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
14932
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
15170
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
14728
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
15227
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
15286
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
9029
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
15321
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
15343
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
DENNYS
5th
AV
BAKERY
COST
OF
GOODS
SOLD
15546
GRILL
COST
OF
GD
SOL
COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER
DMX music
010235
LIQUOR 50TH
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 8
CHECK NO
DATE CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM- OBJECT PO NUM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199274
05/03/99
$23.19
DENNYS 5th AV BAKERY
COST OF GOODS SOLD
15547
GRILL COST OF GD SOL 9029
< *>
6340
$593.80*
AMMUNITION
52811
POLICE DEPT.
199275
05/03/99
$660.00
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
SAF TELETYPE SERVICE
P07MN027
POLICE DEPT. G TELETYPE SERVI
< *>
9047
$660.00*
COST OF GOODS
SOLD
928761
GRILL
199276
05/03/99
$388.00
DIETRICHSON, BILL
AC service
042399 -
ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES.
< *>
2081
$388.00*
REPAIR PARTS
0251236
GOLF CARS
199277 05/03/99
199278 05/03/99
05/03/99
199279 05/03/99
199280 05/03/99
05/03/99
199281 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
199282
199283
199284
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
$55.00
$55.00*
$199.00
$345.00
$544.00*
$19.33
$19.33*
$153.40
$178.55
$331.95*
$37.94
$100.74
$57.05
$195.73*
$2,763.13
$725.55
- $12.76
$529.28
$846.90
$2,075.17
$242.75
- $27.56
$573.89
$197.88
$1,455.57
$9,369.80*
$238.18
$276.90
$515.08*
$2,976.60
$1,465.95
$17.60
$4,391.40
$243.00
$90.50
$2,170.40
$1,804.55
$2,523.45
$3,518.95
DMX
DMX music
010235
LIQUOR 50TH
ST DUES & SUBSCRI-
DON BETZEN GOLF CO
COST OF GOODS
- PRO S
9054
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6340
DON BETZEN GOLF CO
COST OF GOODS
- PRO S
9083
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6340
DPMS Panther Arms
AMMUNITION
52811
POLICE DEPT.
G AMMUNITION
2068
Draper Foods Inc
COST OF GOODS
SOLD
926466
GRILL
COST OF GD SOL
9047
Draper Foods Inc
COST OF GOODS
SOLD
928761
GRILL
COST OF GD SOL
9047
E -Z -GO TEXTRON
Cart parts
0248989
GOLF CARS
REPAIR PARTS
2081
E -Z -GO TEXTRON
REPAIR PARTS
0251236
GOLF CARS
REPAIR PARTS
2083
E -Z -GO TEXTRON
REPAIR PARTS
0252439
GOLF CARS
REPAIR PARTS
2198
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EAGLE WINE
EARL F. ANDERSON
EARL F. ANDERSON
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 36614
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 36615
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 107651
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 39731
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI'39735
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 39739
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 41302
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 108128
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 42669
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 42673
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 42677
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
Playground parts 15964 PATHS & HARD S GENERAL SUPPLI 1686
Field paint 16212 FIELD MAINTENA LINE MARK POWD 2264
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 455104
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 455105
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 455106
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 455665
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 455666
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 458103
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 458104
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 458110
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 458681
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 459238
YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BEE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MIX
VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BEE
YORK SELLING .CST OF GDS MIX
YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS. BEE
VERNON SELLING.CST OF GDS BEE
YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BEE
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<*>
$19,202.40*
199285
05/03/99
$87.38
EDEWAARD, LAURENE
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
041999
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$87.38*
199286
05/03/99
$75.00
Edina Towing Service
Tow
14168
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
05/03/99
$75.00
Edina Towing Service
Tow
14169
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
2105
< *>
$150.00*
199287
05/03/99
$102.00
EIDE SAW & KNIFE
TOOLS
00204267
GENERAL MAINT
TOOLS
1861
< *>
$102.00*
199288
05/03/99
$1,404.00
ELECTRIC SERVICE CO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
115255
FIELD MAINTENA
PROF SERVICES
1665
< *>
$1,404.00*
199289
05/03/99
$257.34
ELIAS, ETHEL
Ambulance refund
041999
GENERAL FD PRO
AMBULANCE FEES
< *>
$257.34*
199290
05/03/99
$573.95
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAIN
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
14563
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
2028
05/03/99
$300.00
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAIN
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
14399
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
2029
< *>
$873.95*
.
199291
05/03/99,
$300.00
EMPLOYEES CLUB
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042199
CONTINGENCIES
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$650.00
EMPLOYEES CLUB
GENERAL SUPPLIES
MAY 1999
CONTINGENCIES
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$950.00*
199292
05/03/99
$335.93
ENVIROMATIC CORPORATION
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU
75589
GRILL
SVC CONTR EQUI
1638
< *>
$335.93*
199293
05/03/99
$77.43
FARBER, DIANE
CRAFT SUPPLIES
042399
ART CENTER ADM
CRAFT SUPPLIES
< *>
$77.43*
199294
05/03/99
$46.45
Farmers Brothers Coffee
COST OF GOODS SOLD
7843126
FRED RICHARDS
COST OF GD SOL
2490
< *>
$46.45*
199295
05/03/99
$61.64
FINANCE DEPARTMENT -LMC
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
050399
ADMINISTRATION
DUES & SUBSCRI
< *>
$61.64*
199296
05/03/99
$45.00
FINE, AGNES
Program
051699
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$45.00*
199297
05/03/99
$108.24
FLOWERS OF EDINA
MEETING EXPENSE
1655
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING EXPENS
2405
< *>
$108.24*
199298
05/03/99
$122.16
Forced Air DBA Wenzel He
Job canceled
98005631
GENERAL FD PRO
MECHAN PERMITS
< *>
$122.16*
199299
05/03/99
$158.15
Fowler Electric
REPAIR PARTS
53907700
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
1305
05/03/99
$49.52
Fowler Electric
REPAIR PARTS
53907701
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
1305
05/03/99
$3.77
Fowler Electric
REPAIR PARTS
53928401
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2324
05/03/99
$7.87
Fowler Electric
REPAIR PARTS
53940101
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
1310
05/03/99
$99.05
Fowler Electric
REPAIR PARTS
53993200
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2324
05/03/99
$23.01
Fowler Electric
REPAIR PARTS
54038700
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2199
< *>
$341.37*
:OUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 10
:HECK NO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
199300
05/03/99
$37.50
Franco, Larry
Service AC
042399
MEDIA LAB
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$37.50*
199301
05/03/99
$336.00
Frey, Michael
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$336.00*
199302
05/03/99
$336.64
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS
TELEPHONE
041499
CENT SVC GENER
TELEPHONE
< *>
$336.64*
199303
05/03/99
$236.90
Frontline Plus Fire & Re
Air bags repairer
6492
FIRE DEPT. GEN
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$236.90*
199304
05/03/99
$128.95
GALL'S INC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
53069273
RESERVE PROGRA
GENERAL SUPPLI
2053
< *>
$128.95*
199305
'
05/03/99
$135.99
GARVEN INCORPORATED
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
6009
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
< *>
$135.99*
199306
05/03/99
$275.00
GCSAA
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
98469898
GOLF ADMINISTR
DUES & SUBSCRI
05/03/99
$150.00
GCSAA
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
98480910
GOLF ADMINISTR
DUES & SUBSCRI
2328
< *>
$425.00*
19.9308
05/03/99
- $3,263.17
GE Capital ITS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
522929
GOLF ADMINISTR
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$1,513.37
GE Capital ITS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
90226618
GOLF ADMINISTR
GENERAL SUPPLI
8388
05/03/99
.$1,814.26
GE Capital ITS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
90236055
GOLF ADMINISTR
GENERAL SUPPLI
8388
05/03/99
$3,628.90
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90262985
POLICE DEPT. G
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$558.32
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90294123
FIRE DEPT. GEN
EQUIP REPLACEM
9943
05/03/99
$3,636.35
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90294123
FIRE DEPT. GEN
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$4,986.92
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
9028395
POLICE DEPT. G
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$279.15
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90300729
ADMINISTRATION
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$279.19
GE Capital ITS
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
90300729
ASSESSING
PROF SERVICES
05/03/99
$279.15,
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90300729
INSPECTIONS
EQUIP REPLACEM
1515
05/03/99
$293.69
GE Capital ITS
DATA PROCESSING
90300729
CENT SVC GENER
DATA PROCESSIN
05/03/99
$470.96
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90300729
CENT SVC GENER
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$470.96
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90300729
PARK ADMIN.
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$29.07
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90309056
POLICE DEPT. G
EQUIP REPLACEM
1329
05/03/99
$1,662.31
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90310381
POLICE DEPT. G
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$450.86
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90319360
ENGINEERING GE
EQUIP REPLACEM
1770.
05/03/99
$450.85
GE Capital ITS
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
90319360
INSPECTIONS
EQUIP REPLACEM
1770
05/03/99
$3,355.54
GE Capital ITS
COPS grant
90319361
COPS MORE GRAN
EQUIP REPLACEM
9420
< *>
$20,896.68*
199309
05/03/99
$600.00
GEISHEKER, PATRICIA
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$600.00*
199310
05/03/99
$56.50
GENERAL SPORTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES.
51919
SKATING & HOCK
GENERAL SUPPLI
1600
05/03/99
$184.90
GENERAL SPORTS
Floor tape
52028
POOL TRACK GRE
GENERAL SUPPLI
1629
< *>
$241.40*
199311
05/03/99
$8,616.87
Gesco Construction
New roof
042399.
CDBG PROG
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$8,616.87*
199312
05/03/99
$565.98
Glass Doctor
New picture window
0420
CDBG PROG
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$565.98*
'
I
i
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM--- - -
- - -- OBJECT-- - - -
-PO -NUM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199313
05/03/99
$290.00
GOLFCRAFT
COST OF GOODS PRO
S
11939
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9448
05/03/99
$145.00
GOLFCRAFT
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S
11950
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9448
05/03/99
$1,029.00
GOLFCRAFT
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S
11952
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9448
05/03/99
$725.00
GOLFCRAFT
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S
11962
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9448
05/03/99
$725.00
GOLFCRAFT
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S
11969
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9448
05/03/99
$85.50
GOLFCRAFT
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S
11978
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9448
< *>
$2,999.50*
199314
05/03/99
$32.31
GOODMAN, NANCY
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$32.31*
199315
05/03/99
$113.75
GOPHER STATE 1 CALL
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
11375
SUPERV. & OVRH
GOPHER STATE
< *>
$113.75*
199316
05/03/99
$66.30 -
Gossman, Bill
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$66.30*
199317
05/03/99
$265.00
GRAFIX SHOPPE
ACCESSORIES
2534
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2007
05/03/99
$265.00
GRAFIX SHOPPE
ACCESSORIES
2615
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2007
< *>
$530.00*
199318
05/03/99
$23.72
GRAINGER
REPAIR PARTS
49573647
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2008
05/03/99
$70.34
GRAINGER
REPAIR PARTS
49574364
PW BUILDING
REPAIR PARTS
1889
05/03/99
$39.13
GRAINGER
REPAIR PARTS
97379077
PW BUILDING
REPAIR PARTS
1889
05/03/99
$153.79
GRAINGER
GENERAL SUPPLIES
49574695
FIELD MAINTENA
GENERAL SUPPLI
2113
05/03/99
$62.83
GRAINGER
GENERAL SUPPLIES
49886283
POOL TRACK GRE
GENERAL SUPPLI
1631
05/03/99
$117.36
GRAINGER
GENERAL SUPPLIES
49575473
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
2310
< *>
$467.17*
199319
05/03/99
$215.00
Grand Pere Wines
Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
6003
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WINE
< *>
$215.00*
199320
05/03/99
$1,034.00
GRAPE BEGINNINGS
INC
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
24097
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$562.00
GRAPE BEGINNINGS
INC
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
24240
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WINE
< *>
$1,596.00*
199321
05/03/99
$8.20
GRAUSAM, STEVE
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
042199
LIQUOR YORK GE
DUES & SUBSCRI
< *>
$8.20*
199322
05/03/99
$420.10
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC
CO.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10442655
POOL TRACK GRE
GENERAL SUPPLI
1623
05/03/99
$413.78
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC
CO.
REPAIR PARTS
10444133
CITY HALL GENE
REPAIR PARTS
2275
05/03/99
$253.68
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC
CO.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10444365
ST LIGHTING OR
GENERAL SUPPLI
1892
05/03/99
$287.95
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC
CO.
Bulbs
10444854
POOL TRACK GRE
GENERAL SUPPLI
1635
< *>
$1,375.51*
199323
05/03/99
$94.21
GREAT AMERICAN MARINE
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
36
FIRE DEPT. GEN
CONTR REPAIRS
2169
05/03/99
$33.39
GREAT AMERICAN MARINE
REPAIR PARTS
36
FIRE DEPT. GEN
REPAIR PARTS
< *>
$127.60*
199324
05/03/99
$920.83
GREER, PAT
Services CL /EB
MAY 1999
ED ADMINISTRAT
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$920.83*
199325
05/03/99
$13,079.00
GREUPNER, JOE
PROFESSIONAL SVCS
- G
042699
GOLF ADMINISTR
PRO SVC - GOLF
< *>
$13,079.00*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 12
CHECK NO
----------------=-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT-
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
199328
05/03/99
$11.10
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
23193
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
- $105.00
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
105718
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
-$2.85
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
105722
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
- $70.98
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
107096
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
- $80.00
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
107097
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
$163.47
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
36605.
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$4,071.46
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD.LI
36606.
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$502.25
GRIGGS
COOPER
_
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
36613
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$6,565.09
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
36616
YORK SELLING
CST
-OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$232.47
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
36617
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
- $301.35
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
107417
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
- $33.48
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
107418
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$1,963.70
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
39733
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$76.05
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
39734
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$87.00
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
39737
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$1,530.62
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
39738
50TH ST 'SELLIN
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$39.80
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
39738
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$3,716.29
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
39740
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
.-$4.66
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
107745
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
-$1.33
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
107861
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
- $135.90
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
107965
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/:03/99
- $87.90
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
108081
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
-$6.50
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
108234
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
- $30.50
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
108235
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
.05/03/99
-$8.50
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
108236
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
-$4.00
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
108237
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/9.9
$142.00
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
42671
VERNON- SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$2,515.09
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
42672
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$672.46
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
42674
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF.GD
LIQU
05/03/99
$25.51
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
42675
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$57.10
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
42678
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$5,744.79
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
42680
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$26.04
GRIGGS
COOPER
& CO.
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
42681
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
< *>
$27,269.34*
199329
05/03/99
$1,583.71
Groth Music
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042699
SPECIAL ACTIVI
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$1,583.71*
199330
.05/03/99
$32.83
Guest,
Lisa
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$32.83*
199331
05/03/99
$100.00
HALE, WILL
Services Edinborough
051399
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO
SVC OTHER
< *>
$100.00*
199332
05/03/99
$35.00
HALL, MARILYN
Program
052099
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO
SVC OTHER
< *>
$35.00*
199333
05/03/99
$155.31
HALLOCK COMPANY
INC
Relays
4991969
PUMP & LIFT ST
REPAIR
PARTS
1537
< *>
$155.31*
199334
05/03/99
$384.73
HARMON
AUTOGLASS
Windshield
14011119
EQUIPMENT OPER
CONTR REPAIRS
2209
< *>
$384.73*
199335
05/03/99
$15.98
HAROLD
CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
14339
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR
PARTS
2011
< *>
$15.98*
�.v ... �..�r
.rte �.rvrv�r.•
-
r..
.��.. .r-. . - - -
-. �-.�� �-
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199336
05/03/99
..$556.27
Harris Companies
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
71087
POOL TRACK GRE
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$556.27*
199337
05/03/99
$7,628.40
Hartland Fuel Products L
GASOLINE
291052
EQUIPMENT OPER
GASOLINE
< *>
$7,628.40*
199338
05/03/99
$512.00
HAY NES, PATRICIA
AC service gallery
042399
ART SUPPLY GIF
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$512.00*
199339
05/03/99
$80.00
HCMC EMS Education
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
042399
RESERVE PROGRA
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$80.00*
.199340
05/03/99
$111.75
HEIMARK FOODS
COST OF GOODS SOLD
013464
GRILL
COST OF GD SOL
9032
< *>
$111.75*
199341
05/03/99
$164.63
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURE
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
35180
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
EQUIP MAINT
05/03/99
$100.02
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURE
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
27066
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
EQUIP MAINT
< *>
$264.65*
199342
05/03/99
$12,675.72
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURE
Special assessments
050399
SPECIAL ASSESS
EQUIP REPLACEM
< *>
$12,675.72*
199343
05/03/99
$121.20
HERC -U -LIFT
Cable
1P4.85519
POOL TRACK GRE
GENERAL SUPPLI
2430
< *>
$121.20*
199344
05/03/99
$306.00
HIRSH, JIM
Soccer ref
042699
GOLF DOME
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$306.00*
19.9345
05/03/99
$732._22
HJ GLOVE OF'AMERICA
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
LSO40199
PRO SHOP
'COST OF GDS -PR
8021
05/03/99
$610.62
HJ GLOVE OF AMERICA
COST OF GOODS - PRO-S
LSO40199
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
8021
< *>
$1,402.84*
199346
05/03/99
$225.00
Hodges, Trish
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
05/03/99
$120.00
Hodges, Trish
AC service Media
042399
MEDIA LAB
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$345.00*
199347
05/03/99
$52.95
Home Juice
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
33431
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
< *>
$52.95*
199348
05/03/99
$2,619.00
HOPKINS COMMUNITY EDUCAT
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
1578
CENT,SVC GENER
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$21619.00*
199349
05/03/99
$23,962.00
Howard R Green Company
Prof eng sery
022157
SUMP PUMP INSP
CIP,
< *>
$23,962.00*
199350
05/03/99,
$838.04
HPI International Inc
PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES
153137
POLICE DEPT. G
PHOTO SUPPLIES
1341
< *>
$838.04*
199351
05/03/99
$8.65
'HUEBSCH'
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU
765862
POOL TRACK GRE
SVC CONTR EQUI
05/03/99
$56.56
HUEBSCH
Towels, mats
770533
POOL TRACK GRE
SVC CONTR EQUI
< *>
$65.21*
199352
05/03/99
$6,122.00
HUNERBERG CONSTRUCTION C
Park shelter construc
12
PKBOND CIP
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$6,122.00
HUNERBERG CONSTRUCTION C
Park shelter equipmen
12
PKBOND'CIP
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$6,122.00
HUNERBERG CONSTRUCTION C
Park shelter equipmen
12
PKBOND CIP
EQUIP REPLACEM
OUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 14
HECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199352
05/03/99
$6,122.00
HUNERBERG CONSTRUCTION C
Park shelter equip
12
PKBOND CIP
EQUIP REPLACEM
05/03/99
$6,122.00
HUNERBERG CONSTRUCTION C
Park shelter equip
12
PKBOND CIP
EQUIP REPLACEM
< *>
$30,610.00*
199353
05/03/99
$104.40
IMPERIAL HEADWEAR INC
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 412378
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6344
05/03/99
$49.90
IMPERIAL HEADWEAR INC
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 412981
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6344
< *>
$154.30*
199354
05/03/99
$384.98
Impressive Printing
99 budget
3668
CENT SVC GENER
PRINTING
4140
< *>
$384.98*
199355
05/03/99
$122.96
Inacom -North Central Are
OFFICE SUPPLIES
1768312
ED ADMINISTRAT
OFFICE SUPPLIE
1771
05/03/99
$344.79
Inacom -North Central Are
Office supplies
1783470
PW BUILDING
GENERAL SUPPLI
1771
< *>
$467.75*
199356
05/03/99
$139.63
IOS Capital
GENERAL SUPPLIES
43677764
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$139.63*
199357
05/03/99
$1,183.60
IZOD CLUB GOLF & TENNIS
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 870365
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6332
05/03/99
$217.62
IZOD CLUB GOLF & TENNIS
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 870366
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6332
05/03/99
$1,179.24
IZOD CLUB GOLF & TENNIS
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 870367
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6332
05/03/99
$111.60
IZOD CLUB GOLF & TENNIS
COST OF GOODS - PRO
S 870368
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6332
< *>
$2,692.06*
199358
05/03/99
$415.35
J -CRAFT INC
ACCESSORIES
22662
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2022
< *>
$415.35*
199359
05/03/99
$141.51
J.H. LARSON COMPANY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
41144980
ST LIGHTING OR
GENERAL SUPPLI
1860
05/03/99
$80.02
J.H. LARSON COMPANY
Shop supplies
41159260
PW BUILDING
REPAIR PARTS
2096
< *>
$221.53*
199360
05/03/99
$1,026.85
JAMAR Technologies Inc
Traffic software.
34210
ENGINEERING GE
EQUIP REPLACEM
2037
< *>
$1,026.85*
199361
05/03/99
$400.00
JEFF ELLIS & ASSOCIATES
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
990565
POOL ADMIN
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$400.00*
199363
05/03/99
$13.27
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
ENGINEERING GE
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$88.26
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$19.96
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
ST LIGHTING OR
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$35.54
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
STREET NAME SI
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$6.61
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
STREET REVOLVI
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$43.94 -
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
POLICE DEPT. G
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$356.61
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$168.14
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
YORK FIRE STAT
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$134.89
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
CITY HALL GENE
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$89.10
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
PW BUILDING
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$12.23
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$548.02
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$204.60
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
GOLF ADMINISTR
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$149.34
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
ARENA ICE MAIN
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$515.09
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
ED BUILDING &
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$184.43
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$5.80
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
50TH ST OCCUPA
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$16.07
JERRY'S HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
YORK OCCUPANCY
GENERAL SUPPLI
199371
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
- $26.15
- $227.90
- $28.65
- $26.15
- $154.41
- $26.15
- $222.29
- $21.40
$4,765.45
$3,365.35
$3,948.86
$2,736.01
-$4.92
-$8.56
-$4.82
-$6.20
- $58.55
- $91.55
- $58.55
$2,115.23
$965.80
$9,001.14
$3,006.49
$4,590.71
$2,010.78
$83.90
$1,222.01
$504.73
$386.60
$1,126.89
$714.50
$4,780.72
$1,035.15
$3,093.97
$5,030.93
$709.05
$1,254.10
$459.55
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87260
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 87261
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87262
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87263
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 87264
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87265
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 87266
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87267
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 963231
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 963232
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 963233
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 963234
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87502
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87503
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87504
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87505
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87594
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 87595
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87596
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 965929
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 965930
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 965931
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 965932
COST'OF GOODS SOLD LI 965933
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 965934
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968603
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 9686.04
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968605
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968606
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968607
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968608
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968609
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968610
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968611
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968612
COST-OF GOODS SOLD WI 968613
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968614
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968615
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQU
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
VERNON'SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQU
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQU
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
---- ---------
PROGRAM
---- -------
OBJECT-- _ - -
- - - - --
-PO NUM
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199363
05/03/99
.$25.54
JERRY'S
HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
050399
VERNON OCCUPAN
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
,$2,617.44*
199364
05/03/99
$397.00
JERRY'S
PRINTING
Print
A9042
ART CENTER ADM
PRINTING
6703
05/03/99
$399.38
JERRY'S
PRINTING
PRINTING
A9435
INSPECTIONS
PRINTING
05/03/99
$2,010.00
:JERRY'S
PRINTING
PRINTING
A9517
ART CENTER ADM
PRINTING
1787
< *>
$2,806.38*
199365
05/03/99
$34.50
JERRY'S
TRANSMISSION
SER REPAIR PARTS
I5824
FIRE DEPT. GEN.REPAIR
PARTS
1994
< *>
$34.50*
199366
05/03/99
$100.00
Jobe,'Charles
Uniform reimbursement
042099
POOL TRACK GRE
LAUNDRY
< *>
$100.00*
199367
05/03/99
$98.71
Johns',
Richard
Uniform reimbursment
042099
POOL TRACK GRE
LAUNDRY
< *>
$98.71*
199371
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
- $26.15
- $227.90
- $28.65
- $26.15
- $154.41
- $26.15
- $222.29
- $21.40
$4,765.45
$3,365.35
$3,948.86
$2,736.01
-$4.92
-$8.56
-$4.82
-$6.20
- $58.55
- $91.55
- $58.55
$2,115.23
$965.80
$9,001.14
$3,006.49
$4,590.71
$2,010.78
$83.90
$1,222.01
$504.73
$386.60
$1,126.89
$714.50
$4,780.72
$1,035.15
$3,093.97
$5,030.93
$709.05
$1,254.10
$459.55
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87260
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 87261
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87262
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87263
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 87264
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87265
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 87266
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87267
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 963231
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 963232
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 963233
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 963234
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87502
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87503
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87504
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87505
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87594
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 87595
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 87596
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 965929
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 965930
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 965931
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 965932
COST'OF GOODS SOLD LI 965933
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 965934
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968603
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 9686.04
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968605
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968606
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968607
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968608
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968609
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968610
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968611
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 968612
COST-OF GOODS SOLD WI 968613
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968614
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 968615
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQU
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
VERNON'SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQU
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQU
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
=NCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 16
:HECK NO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
199371
05/03/99
$194.15
JOHNSON BROTHERS
LIQUOR
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
968796
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
< *>
$56,135.82*
199372
05/03/99
$14.50
JOHNSON, NAOMI
Art work sold
042399
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
05/03/99.
$27.80
JOHNSON, NAOMI
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042399
ART CENTER ADM
GENERAL SUPPLI
05/03/99
$11.46
JOHNSON, NAOMI
OFFICE SUPPLIES
042399
ART CENTER ADM
OFFICE SUPPLIE
05/03/99
$73.33
JOHNSON, NAOMI
CRAFT SUPPLIES
042399
ART CENTER ADM
CRAFT SUPPLIES
05/03/99
$24.40
JOHNSON, NAOMI
PRINTING
042399
ART CENTER ADM
PRINTING
05/03/99
$37.88
JOHNSON, NAOMI
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042399
ART CENTER BLD
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$189.37*
199373
05/03/99
$360.00
JOHNSON, RICHARD
H.
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$360.00+
199374
05/03/99
$323.82
JOHNSON, STEVE
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
042299
•SUPERV. & OVRH
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$323.82*
i
I
199375
05/03/99
$342.42
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY
OF GOLD
REPAIR PARTS
147644
'•CITY HALL GENE
REPAIR PARTS
1699 -
<*>
$342.42*
199376
05/03/99
$288.80
JORDAN BEVERAGE
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
57910
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$190.00
JORDAN BEVERAGE
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
57911
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
< *>
$478.80*
.199377
05/03/99
$26.04
JULIEN, DIANE
Mileage
042199
EQUIPMENT OPER
LIC & PERMITS
< *>
$26.04*
199378
05/03/99
$75.00
JUST FRIENDS BIG
BAND
Services Edinborough
051799
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$75.00*
199379
05/03/99
$106.60
Kaman Industrial
Technol
REPAIR PARTS
Z169474
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2075
05/03/99
$52.48
Kaman Industrial
Technol
REPAIR PARTS
Z169646
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2075
< *>
$159.08*
199380
05/03/99
$86.21
KAR PRODUCTS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
315919
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL'SUPPLI
2082
< *>
$86.21*
199381
05/03/99
$58.50
Keenan, Lori
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$58.50*
199382
05/03/99
$60.00
Kenline, Jill
Refund skating lesson
042099
EDINB /CL PROG
LESSON PRGM IN
< *>
$60.00*
199383
05/03/99
$227.50
Keppers, Ken
-
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$227.50*
199384
05/03/99
$99.82
KEPRIOS, JOHN
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042099
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$99.82*
199385
05/03/99
$16.76
Kirchman, Steve A
TELEPHONE
042199
'INSPECTIONS
TELEPHONE
< *>
$16.76*
199387
05/03/99
$1,116.50
Kiwi Kai Imports
Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
107390
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
,05/03/99
$1,500.00
Kiwi Kai Imports
Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
107391
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$389.50
Kiwi Kai Imports
Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
107392
50TH ST SELLIN
I
CST OF GD WINE
\1�:�)J1 VaGjc 1/
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199387
05/03/99
$1,039.00
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
107393
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$349.60
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
107394
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$150.40
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
107418
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
- $27.50
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
CM414
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
- $104.80
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
CM414.
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
-$9.66
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
CM414A
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$338.00
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
107740
50TH ST`SELLIN
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$164.95
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
107741
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$230.00
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
107742
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$1,085.60
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
107743
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$230.00
Kiwi
Kai Imports Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
107744
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$894.95
Kiwi
Kai Imports the
COST OF GOODS SOLD
WI
107789
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WINE
< *>
$7,346.54*
199388
05/03/99
$71.50
Kloppmann, Maren
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$71.50*
199389
05/03/99
$47.04
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
Hand tools
371498
BUILDING MAINT
TOOLS
1845
05/03/99
$48.54
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
TOOLS
371538
GENERAL STORM
TOOLS
1848
05/03/99
$101.76
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
371601
GENERAL MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
1851
05/03/99
$12.63
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
Building supplies
371666
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
1856
05/03/99
$35.71
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
REPAIR PARTS
371682
BUILDING MAINT
REPAIR PARTS
1858
05/03/99
$13.07
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
372044
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
1938
05/03/99
$65.75
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
372111
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPLI
2036
05/03/99
$15.50
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
372177
GENERAL STORM
GENERAL SUPPLI
1946
05/03/99
$40.95
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
Tools for forestry
de
372247
BUILDING MAINT
TOOLS
1435
05/03/99
$110.24
KNOX
COMMERCIAL CREDIT
TOOLS
372285
GENERAL MAINT
TOOLS
1948
< *>
$491.19*
199390
05/03/99
$47.93
KREMER SPRING & ALIGNMEN
REPAIR PARTS
088132
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1753
< *>
$47.93*
199391
05/03/99
$419.10
KUETHER DISTRIBUTING CO
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
236466
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$50.80
KUETHER DISTRIBUTING CO
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
236583
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$868.15
KUETHER DISTRIBUTING CO
COST OF GOODS SOLD
BE
237118
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
< *>
$1,338.05*
199392
05/03/99
$19,714.31
LaBreche & Murray Public
About town
01455
COMMUNICATIONS
MAG /NEWSLET EX
< *>
$19,714.31*
199393
05/03/99
$138.00
Lair,
Jeffery J
Velcro strap
041999
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPLI
1360
< *>
$138.00*
199394
05/03/99
$137.00
LaVan Floor Covering Com
RUBBISH REMOVAL
33385
CLUB HOUSE
RUBBISH REMOVA
2145
< *>
$137.00*
199395
05/03/99
$134.68
LAWSON PRODUCTS INC.
REPAIR PARTS
1053019
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2095
05/03/99
$389.32
LAWSON PRODUCTS INC.
Stock
1057996
STREET NAME SI
GENERAL SUPPLI
2259
< *>
$524.00*
199396
05/03/99
$190.10
Lesco Inc
GENERAL SUPPLIES
9RFSR7
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$190.10*
199397
05/03/99
$532.50
Life
Time Fitness Inc
ADVERTISING OTHER
041599
ED ADMINISTRAT
ADVERT OTHER
< *>
$532.50*
;OUNCIL CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 18
:HECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
•-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199398
05/03/99
$491.90
Lifeguard
Systems Inc
Water
rescue
3170
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL
SUPPLI
9954.
< *>
$491.90*
199399
05/03/99
$147.19
LITTLE BLIND SPOT, THE
REPAIR
PARTS
040899
RANGE.
REPAIR
PARTS
< *>
$147.19*
199400
05/03/99
$388.43
LITTLE FALLS MACHINE
Hydo
cylinder
00021955
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR
PARTS
1464
< *>
$388.43*
199401
05/03/99
$190.10
Lowell's
Floor
dry
7416747
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL
SUPPLI
1962
< *>
$190.10*
199402
05/03/99
$100.00
Lowey, Dick
GENERAL SUPPLIES
041499
CONTINGENCIES
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$100.00*
199403
05/03/99
$405.00
MAAO
CONFERENCES &
SCHOOLS
041699
ASSESSING
CONF &
SCHOOLS.
< *>
$405.00*
199404
.05/03/99
$574.50
MAC QUEEN
EQUIP INC.
REPAIR
PARTS
2992996
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR
PARTS
1682
05/03/99
$207.68
MAC QUEEN
EQUIP INC.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
2993272
SEWER CLEANING
GENERAL
SUPPLI
1534
05/03/99
$544.66
MAC QUEEN
EQUIP INC.
REPAIR
PARTS
2993290
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR
PARTS
2014
05/03/99
- $331.04
MAC QUEEN
EQUIP INC.
Credit
2584
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR
PARTS
2014
05/03/99
$106.78
MAC QUEEN
EQUIP INC.
REPAIR
PARTS
2993416
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR
PARTS
2021
05/03/99
$427.91
MAC QUEEN
EQUIP INC.
REPAIR
PARTS
2993291
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR
PARTS
2014
< *>
$1,530.49*
199405
05/03/99
$16.00
MAMA
MEETING
EXPENSE
042299
ADMINISTRATION
MEETING EXPENS
< *>
$16.00*
199408
05/03/99
$1,806.60
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
890140
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$34.00
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
890141
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$36.00
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
890142
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$70.05
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
890336
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF'GDS
BEE
05/03/99
$1,412.65
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
890337
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$1,350.75
MARK.VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
890351
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
.
05/03/99
$25.20
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
890352
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$18.40
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
890353
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$603.05
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892429
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$37.30
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
892430
50TH ST SELLIN
-CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$145.60
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892431
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$13.25
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
892432
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
.$18.40
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892433
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$877.35
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892562
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$12.80
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892563
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$21.80
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
892564
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$436.80.
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892727
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$596.05
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892750
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$2,360.87
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892751
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$9.25
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
892752
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$23.00
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892753
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$73.60
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
892754
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$130.00
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
894479
GRILL
CST
OF
GDS BEE
9034
05/03/99
$717.28
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
894966
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$1,773.95
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
895119
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
05/03/99
$18.65
MARK
VII
SALES
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
BE
895120
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS BEE
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------7------------------------------------------------------------
199408
05/03/99
$753.20
MARK VII SALES
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
895121
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$37.30
MARK VII SALES
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
895122
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
< *>
$13,413.15*
199409
05/03/99
$1,089.01
MATRX MEDICAL INC
FIRST AID SUPPLIES
659783
FIRE DEPT. GEN
FIRST AID SUPP
1982
05/03/99
$161.80
MATRX MEDICAL INC
Ambulance supplies
660412
FIRE DEPT. GEN
FIRST AID SUPP
1373
05/03/99
$10.52
MATRX MEDICAL INC
Ambulance supplies
660419
FIRE DEPT. GEN
FIRST AID SUPP
1982
< *>
$1,261.33*
199410
05/03/99
$437.95
Maximum Solutions Inc
OFFICE SUPPLIES
598
ARENA ADMINIST
OFFICE SUPPLIE
2040
< *>
$437.95*
199411
05/03/99
$965.31
MCCAREN DESIGN
TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUB
9599
POOL TRACK GRE
TREES FLWR SHR
< *>
$965.31*
199412
05/03/99
$664.50
MCGARVEY /SUPERIOR COFFEE
COST OF GOODS SOLD
8141122
GRILL
COST OF GD SOL
9042
< *>
$664.50*
199413
05/03/99
$4,544.27
MEDICA
HOSPITALIZATION
19912112
CENT SVC GENER
HOSPITALIZATIO
< *>
$4,544.27*
199414
05/03/99
$83,575.26
MEDICA
HOSPITALIZATION
19912110
CENT SVC GENER
HOSPITALIZATIO
< *>
$83,575.26*
199415
05/03/99
$247.44
MENARDS ACCT #35170288
GENERAL SUPPLIES
58502
PW BUILDING
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$247.44*
199416
05/03/99
$148.07
MENARDS * ACCT #30240251
GENERAL SUPPLIES
3450
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPLI
2080
05/03/99
$114.87
MENARDS * ACCT #30240251
GENERAL SUPPLIES
4639
GENERAL TURF C
GENERAL SUPPLI
2115
< *>
$262.94*
199417
05/03/99
$634.10
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
50627
POOL TRACK GRE
CLEANING SUPPL
1627
05/03/99
$165.87
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
50628
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
2087
05/03/99
$975.54
MERIT SUPPLY
4 mats
50649
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL SUPPLI
1896
05/03/99
$169.23
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
50658
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPLI
2101
05/03/99
$847.62
MERIT SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
50665
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPLI
2239
05/03/99
$283.50
MERIT SUPPLY
Floor care
50672
YORK OCCUPANCY
GENERAL SUPPLI
2107
05/03/99
$989.60
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
50676
POOL TRACK GRE
CLEANING SUPPL
1632
05/03/99
$635.49
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
50677
PW BUILDING
CLEANING SUPPL
2122
05/03/99
$93.72
MERIT SUPPLY
Window cleaner
50693
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL SUPPLI
2274•
05/03/99
$372.64
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
50748
PW BUILDING
CLEANING SUPPL
05/03/99
$578.67
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
50759
ARENA BLDG /GRO
CLEANING SUPPL
2472
< *>
$5,745.98*
199418
05/03/99
$729.56
METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
33982
EDINA ATHLETIC
GENERAL SUPPLI
1668
05/03/99
$468.39
METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY
Tennis nets
34141
PATHS & HARD S
GENERAL SUPPLI
2097
< *>
$1,197.95*
199419
05/03/99
$225,192.23
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENV
Sewer service
685214
SEWER TREATMEN
SEWER SVC METR
< *>
$225,192.23*
199420
05/03/99
$220.00
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENV
Permit
686602
WATER TREATMEN
LIC & PERMITS
< *>
$220.00*
199421
05/03/99
$40.00
MGCSA
® registrations
042299
GOLF ADMINISTR
CONF & SCHOOLS
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 20
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<*>
$40.00*
199422
05/03/99
- $10.35
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLI
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
62819161
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
- $27.50
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLI
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
60494082
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$145.85
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLI
COST OF GOODS SOLD
66664181-FRED
RICHARDS
COST OF GD SOL
9046
05/03/99
$176.75
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLI
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
60080188
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$179.10
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLI
COST OF GOODS SOLD
66668042
GRILL
COST OF GD SOL
9046
05/03/99
$146.90
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLI
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
62108085
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$280.25
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLI
COST OF GOODS SOLD
MI
62882029
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$210.35
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLI
COST OF GOODS SOLD
66673042
GRILL
COST OF GD SOL
9046
< *>
$1,101.35*
199423
05/03/99
$108.60
MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC TOOL
TOOLS
25179970
GENERAL MAINT
TOOLS
2100
< *>
$108.60*
199424,
05/03/99
$26.67
Minn Blue Digital -A
GENERAL SUPPLIES
155370
ENGINEERING GE
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$26.67*
199425
05/03/99
$2,549.75
MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN S
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
31497
DISTRIBUTION
CONTR REPAIRS
1542
05/03/99
$840.00
MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN S
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
31499
DISTRIBUTION
CONTR REPAIRS
1544
< *>
$3,389.75*
199426
05/03/99
$9,277.74
MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPA
Water purchased
040999
DISTRIBUTION
WATER PURCHASE
< *>
$9,277.74*
199427
05/03/99
$128.19
MINNEGASCO
HEAT
050199
YORK FIRE STAT
HEAT
05/03/99
$46.96
MINNEGASCO
HEAT
050199
BUILDING MAINT
HEAT
05/03/99
$35.21
MINNEGASCO
HEAT
050199
BUILDING MAINT
HEAT
05/03/99
$49.59
MINNEGASCO
HEAT
050199
BUILDING MAINT
HEAT
< *>
$259.95*
199428
05/03/99
$51.46
MINNESOTA CLAY USA
COST OF GOODS SOLD
45804
ART SUPPLY GIF
COST OF GD SOL
1789
< *>
$51.46*
199429
05/03/99
$20.00
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
LICENSES & PERMITS
041699
GENERAL TURF C
LIC & PERMITS
< *>
$20.00*
199430
05/03/99
$25.00
MINNESOTA GOLF ASSOCIATI
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
041499
GOLF ADMINISTR
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$25.00*
199431
05/03/99
$75.00
MINNESOTA MINI STORAGE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042699
POLICE DEPT. G
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$75.00*
199432
05/03/99
$30.00
Minnesota State Board of
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042099
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$30.00*
199433
05/03/99
$15.00
Minnesota State Board of
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042099
BUILDING MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$15.00*
199434
05/03/99
$50.00
Minnesota State Board of
GENERAL SUPPLIES
041499
INSPECTIONS
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$50.00*
199435
05/03/99
$50.00
Minnesota State Board of
GENERAL SUPPLIES
042199
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL'SUPPLI
< *>
$50.00*
2U- APR -1999 (18:53) page 21
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199436
05/03/99
$33.23
MINNESOTA TROPHIES & GIF
GENERAL SUPPLIES
100713
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPLI
1364
< *>
$33.23*
I
199437
05/03/99
$193.20-
Mone, James
Ambulance refund
041999
GENERAL FD PRO
AMBULANCE FEES
< *>
$193.20*
199438
05/03/99
$738.05
Mooers Printing.Inc
Letterhead /envelopes
1154
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$738.05*
199439
05/03/99
$100.00
MOONLIGHT SERENADERS
Services Edinborough
052799
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$100.00+
199440
05/03/99
$259.66
MOORE MEDICAL
FIRST AID SUPPLIES
0273077
FIRE DEPT. GEN
FIRST AID SUPP
1983
< *>
$259.66*
199441
05/03/99
$16.02
MTI DISTRIBUTING CO
GENERAL SUPPLIES
I26662
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPLI
1750
05/03/99
$463.48
MTI DISTRIBUTING CO I
REPAIR PARTS
I267626
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2026
05/03/99
$372.17
MTI DISTRIBUTING CO
REPAIR PARTS
120629
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2023
05/03/99
$211.43
MTI DISTRIBUTING CO
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
I267923
CENTENNIAL LAK
CONTR REPAIRS
2497
c *>
$1,063.10*
I
I
199442
05/03/99
$709.20
NAME BRAND SPORTS
Uniforms
9689
CENTENNIAL LAK
LAUNDRY
2496
< *>
$709.20*
199443
05/03/99
$66.55
Napa Auto Parts
REPAIR PARTS
626398
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
05/03/99
$85.95
Napa Auto Parts
REPAIR PARTS
626821
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
05/03/99
$155.47
Napa Auto Parts
REPAIR PARTS
629926
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
05/03/99
$14.89
Napa.Auto Parts
REPAIR PARTS
629930
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
05/03/99
-$7.44
Napa Auto Parts
REPAIR PARTS
629937
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
05/03/99
$13.30
Napa Auto Parts
REPAIR PARTS
630061
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
05/03/99
$7.44
Napa Auto Parts
REPAIR PARTS
630407
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
< *>
$336.16*
199444
05/03/99
$82.50
NELSON, BARBARA
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
05/03/99-
$488.00
NELSON, BARBARA
Service media
042399
MEDIA LAB
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$570.50*
199445
05/03/99
$901.00
NELSON,.) THOMAS
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$901.00*
199446
05/03/99
$60.00
NELSON, LARRY
Golf lessons
042299
GOLF DOME
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$60.00*
199447
05/03/99
$432.00
New France Wine Co
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
0020.
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WINE
< *>
$432.00*
199448
05/03/99
$87.88
NIBBE, MICHAEL
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS.041999
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$87.88*
199449
05/03/99
$100.00
NORTH COUNTRY CLOGGERS
Services Edinborough -052099
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$100.00*
199450
05/03/99
$40.80
NORTH STAR ICE
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
80280
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$88.00
NORTH STAR ICE
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
80283
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$141.48
NORTH STAR ICE
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
81281
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
:OUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 22
:HECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
- PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199450
05/03/99
$40.14
NORTH STAR ICE
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI,81283
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$20.40
NORTH STAR ICE
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
81288
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MIX
< *>
$330.82*
199451
05/03/99
$80.26
NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL
Shackle
227795
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1459
05/03/99
$775.77
NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL
gear
229959
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1747
05/03/99
$34.89
NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL
REPAIR PARTS
230092
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1751
05/03/99
$10.10
NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL
valve
230241
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1999
05/03/99
- $253.00
NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL
ACCESSORIES
230963CM
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2109
05/03/99
$9.96
NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL
Shop parts
231382
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2026
05/03/99
$958.82
NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL
Gear
231506
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2030
< *>
$1,616.80*
199452
05/03/99
$161.84
NORTH STAR TURF
GENERAL SUPPLIES
194477
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPLI
1814
05/03/99
$431.07
NORTH STAR TURF
REPAIR PARTS
195208
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2265
< *>
$592.91*
199453
05/03/99
$27.85
Northern Tool & Equipmen
GENERAL SUPPLIES
52780192
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL SUPPLI
2092
< *>
$27.85*
199454
05/03/99
$86.10
Northland Chemical Corp
GENERAL SUPPLIES
039127
PW BUILDING
GENERAL SUPPLI
1490
< *>
$86.10*
199455
05/03/99
$13.13
NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY
COST OF GOODS SOLD
15377400
ART SUPPLY GIF
COST OF GD SOL
1506
05/03/99
$219.60
NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY
COST OF GOODS SOLD
15421800
ART SUPPLY GIF
COST OF GD SOL
1237
< *>
$232.73*
199456
05/03/99
$223.75
NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO
TIRES & TUBES
53885
EQUIPMENT OPER
TIRES & TUBES
1940
05/03/99
$65.00
NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO
TIRES & TUBES
53958
EQUIPMENT OPER
TIRES & TUBES
1940
< *>
$288.75*
199457
05/03/99
$90.00
Nygaard, Jeff
Juried show winner
042399
ART CNTR PROG
DONATIONS
< *>
$90.00*
199458
05/03/99
$40.00
Ohlhorst_, Lynn
Program
051399
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$40.00*
199459
05/03/99
$188.29
Olsen Chain & Cable Co I
Chain
106272
PUMP & LIFT ST
TOOLS
2016
05/03/99
$37.34.
Olsen Chain & Cable Cc I
GENERAL SUPPLIES
106273
CENTENNIAL LAK
GENERAL SUPPLI
1985
05/03/99
$45.60
Olsen Chain & Cable Co I
GENERAL SUPPLIES
106738
MAINT OF COURS
GENERAL SUPPLI'
2084
05/03/99
$116.16
Olsen Chain & Cable Cc I
REPAIR PARTS
107144
MAINT OF COURS
REPAIR PARTS
2201
< *>
$387.39*
199460
05/03/99
$195.00
Olsen Fire Inspection
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
9812131
BUILDING MAINT
CONTR REPAIRS
05/03/99
$135.00
Olsen Fire Inspection
Inspection .
9812132
GOLF DOME
SVC CONTR EQUI
2383
< *>
$330.00*
199461
05/03/99
$268.38
OLSON, TIM
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
042099
POLICE DEPT, G
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$268.38*
199462
05/03/99
$176.50
Otis Spunkmeyer Inc
COST OF GOODS SOLD
2570196
GRILL
COST OF GD SOL
9037
< *>
$176.50*
199463
05/03/99
$35.75
PANCAKE, CHAR
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$35.75*
LY- .1 -1III % - ; "I jd/ jy LJ
CHECK NO DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR i DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM I OBJECT PO NUM
------------------------------------7------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199464 05/03/99 $43.30 PAPER WAREHOUSE Vol rec 130082 CONTINGENCIES GENERAL SUPPLI
*� Caz in*
199465 05/03/99
199466 05/03/99
199467 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
199468 05/03/99
199469 05/03/99
199470
199472
199475
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
$834.25 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC Physical
$834.25*
$47.45 PASS, GRACE
$47.45*
- $30.00 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY
$175.80 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY
$128.30 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY
$274.10*
$285.00 PERFERRED HEATING
$285.00*
$35.00 Perkins, Kirstin
$35.00*
$19.00 Perkins, William
$19.00*
$3.30
$8.00
$62.30
$10.60
$4.50
$7.75
$16.00
$28.88
$3.66 .
$6.60
$18.18
$8.00
$12.23
$8.00
$29.39
$10.00
$19.13
$256.52*
- $43.45
'- $25.50
- $72,.00
$56.90
'$938.20
$9,026.05
$565.17
$2,815.80
- $25.15
- $50.30
- $111.45
- $11.02
- $18.32
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY.CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS'WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS.WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE.& SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
042699
CENT SVC GENER ADVERT PERSONL
Art work sold 041599 ART CNTR PROG SALES OTHER
COST OF GOODS SOLD 78915611 FRED RICHARDS COST OF GD SOL 9038
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 78937663 YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MIX
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 78963145 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MIX
GENERAL SUPPLIES 83891 INSPECTIONS GENERAL SUPPLI 2292
Refund tennis 042399 GENERAL FD PRO REGISTRATION F
Refund GHIN 041799 GOLF PROG COMPUTR HANDIC
MEETING EXPENSE 050399
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 050399
MEETING EXPENSE 050399
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 050399
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 050399
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 050399
MEETING EXPENSE 050399
MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 050399
GENERAL SUPPLIES 050399
EDUCATION PROGRAMS 050399
GENERAL SUPPLIES 050399
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 050399
MEETING EXPENSE 1 050399
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 050399
GENERAL SUPPLIES 050399
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 050399
GENERAL SUPPLIES 050399
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3192595
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3192771
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3192772
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI ,485504
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 485507
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 485508
COST OF GOODS SOLD LI 485509
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 485510
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3193021
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3193022
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3193023
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3193024
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3193105
CITY COUNCIL MEETING EXPENS
ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION MEETING EXPENS
ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE
PLANNING MILEAGE
FINANCE MILEAGE
ASSESSING MEETING EXPENS
POLICE DEPT. G MILEAGE
PUBLIC HEALTH GENERAL SUPPLI
HUMAN RELATION EDUCATION PRGM
CENT SVC GENER GENERAL SUPPLI
PARK ADMIN. CONF & SCHOOLS
PARK ADMIN. MEETING EXPENS
ADAPTIVE RECRE PROF SERVICES
ADAPTIVE RECRE GENERAL SUPPLI
GENERAL TURF C CONF & SCHOOLS
RECYCLING GENERAL SUPPLI
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MIX
YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQU
YORK SELLING CST.OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD. LIQU
VERNON SELLING CST'OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST;OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST'OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST.OF GD WINE
)UNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53). page 24
iECK NO
•- - - - - --
DATE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT,
PO NUM
L99475
05/03/99
$1,562.65
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
489597
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$2,214.30
PHILLIPS
WINE &.SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
489598
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
-$9.16
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
3193260
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
-$9.16
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
3193261
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
-$5.59
'PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
3193262
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
-$8.27
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
3193263
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
-$6.67
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
3193264
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
$50.15
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
487572
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$217.50
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
487574
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$1,095.50
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
487575
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
$198.55
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
487576
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$7,874.80
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
487577
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
$527.20
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
487578
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$1,826.35
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
487579
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
$308.25
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
488023
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
$1,329.30
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
489594
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
$118.60
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
489595
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$1,357.10
PHILLIPS
-WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
489596
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GD WINE
05/03/99
$713.85
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
LI
489599
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD LIQU
05/03/99
$887.10
PHILLIPS
WINE & SPIRITS
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
489600
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
< *>
$33,287.28*
199476
05/03/99
$26.00
Phillips,
Linda
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$26.00*
L99477
05/03/99
$3,796.00
Pierce Manufacturing Inc
Accident repairs
121748
FIRE DEPT. GEN
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$3,796.00*
L99478
05/03/99
$106.68
Ping
COST
OF GOODS
- PRO S
3876015
PRO SHOP
COST OF
GDS -PR
8025
05/03/99
$315.67
Ping
COST
OF GOODS
- PRO S
3887915
PRO SHOP
COST OF
GDS -PR
< *>
$422.35*
199479
05/03/99
$893.16
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
999254
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$19.00
Pinnacle
Distributing
OFFICE SUPPLIES
99327
LIQUOR 50TH ST
OFFICE
SUPPLIE
05/03/99
$261.25
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
- PRO S
999323
PRO SHOP
COST OF
GDS -PR
2163
05/03/99
$322.53
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
999330
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$347.34
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
999331
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$225.80
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
999341
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$410.63
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
999345
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$942.78
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
999432
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$620.25
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
999475
VERNON SELLING
CST
OF
GDS MIX
05/03/99
$595.44
Pinnacle
Distributing
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
MI
999493
50TH ST SELLIN
CST
OF
GDS MIX
< *>
$4,638.18*
199480
- 05/03/99
$425.76
PIP PRINTING
-PRINTING
9109
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRINTING
2155
05/03/99
$625.37
PIP PRINTING
TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUB
9112
ED ADMINISTRAT
TREES FLWR SHR
2188
< *>
$1,051.13*
199481.
05/03/99
$30.45
Polo Ralph Lauren Corpor
COST
OF GOODS
- PRO S
852674
PRO SHOP
COST
OF
GDS -PR
6336
< *>
$30.45*
199482
05/03/99
$207.80
Porthan,
Todd
CONFERENCES &
SCHOOLS
041999
FIRE DEPT. GEN
CONF
&
SCHOOLS
< *>
$207.80*
199483
05/03/99
$1,778.65
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
COST
OF GOODS
SOLD
WI
36618
YORK SELLING
CST
OF
GD WINE
11e:5s1 page Z5
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199483
05/03/99
$1,481.18
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
39732
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$706.77
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
39736
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$579.52
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
39741
YORK SELLING
CST OF GD WINE.
05/03/99
- $16.96
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
108106
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$1,359.47
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
42670
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$1,236.11
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
42676
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WINE
05/03/99
$1,564.05
PRIOR WINE COMPANY
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
42679
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS MIX
< *>
$8,688.79*
199484
05/03/99
$92.71
Protection One
ALARM SERVICE
040699
50TH ST OCCUPA
ALARM SERVICE
05/03/99
$102.07
Protection One
ALARM SERVICE
040699
YORK OCCUPANCY
ALARM SERVICE
05/03/99
$59.59
Protection One
ALARM SERVICE
040699
VERNON OCCUPAN
ALARM SERVICE
< *>
$254.37*
199485
05/03/99
$119.99
RADIO SHACK ACCT REC
TV stand
YORK OCCUPANCY
GENERAL SUPPLI
1832
< *>
$119.99*
_020670
199486
05/03/99
$83.85
RASKIN, PHIL A.
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$83.85*
199487
05/03/99
$512.07
RDO Equipment Co
ACCESSORIES
99450
EQUIPMENT OPER
ACCESSORIES
2013
< *>
$512.07*
199488
05/03/99
$127.50
RDO Truck Center
REPAIR PARTS
158151
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2229
< *>
$127.50*
199489
05/03/99
$131.75
RED WING SHOES
Boots
1095
GENERAL MAINT
SAFETY EQUIPME
2307
< *>
$131.75*
199490
05/03/99
$201.29
ROCHESTER MIDLAND
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU
99110044
GRILL
SVC CONTR EQUI
< *>
$201.29*
199491
05/03/99
$1,060.00
Ron Olson Electric Co
Upgrade electric
0423
CDBG PROG
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$1,060.00*
199492
05/03/99
$115.00
SCHATTAUER, JIM
Services Edinborough
051899
ED ADMINISTRAT
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$115.00*
199493
05/03/99
$26.00
Scheel, Wade
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$26.00*
199494
05/03/99
$405.92
SCHWAB - VOLLHABER
Belt
49451
POOL TRACK GRE
GENERAL SUPPLI
1630
< *>
$405.92*
199495
05/03/99
$21.29
SEARS
Wrench
SR757597
EQUIPMENT OPER
TOOLS
2099
< *>
$21.29*
199496
05/03/99
$68.90
Seifert, Elizabeth
Art work sold
041599
ART CNTR PROG
SALES OTHER
< *>
$68.90*
199497
05/03/99
$78,100.00
Sela Roofing & Remodelin
Flat new roof
7499
GOLF PROG
BUILDINGS
< *>
$78,100.00*
199498
05/03/99
$40.00
SEVERUD, KEN
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
041499
GOLF DOME
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$40.00*
OUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 26
HECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199499
05/03/99
$72.00
Shahriar, Sima
Skating class refund
041999
ARENA BLDG /GRO
PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$72.00*
199500
05/03/99
$117.19
Shutters 'n Shades
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10037
RANGE
CONTR REPAIRS
2387
< *>
$117.19*
199501
05/03/99
$303.00
SIITARI, MICHAEL
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
042399
POLICE DEPT. G
CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$303.00*
199502
05/03/99
$90.00
Silvers, Roxanne
Juried show winner
042399
ART CNTR PROG
DONATIONS
< *>
$90.00*
199503
05/03/99
$281.29
Siman, Arlene
Ambulance refund
041999
GENERAL FD PRO
AMBULANCE FEES
< *>
$281.29*
199504
05/03/99
$60.75
SIMS SECURITY
Guard
9298674
POOL TRACK GRE
PROF SERVICES
05/03/99
$136.68
SIMS SECURITY
Guard
9312548
POOL TRACK GRE
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$197.43*
199505
05/03/99
$786.80
SMESTAD, LYLE
HOSPITALIZATION
041999
CENT SVC GENER
HOSPITALIZATIO
< *>
$786.80*
199506
05/03/99
$135.00
SMITH & WESSON CAMERAS
PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES
042699
POLICE DEPT.-G
PHOTO SUPPLIES
< *>
$135.00*
199507
05/03/99
$1,912.05
SOUTHSIDE.DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
94206
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$36.45
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
307612
FRED RICHARDS
CST OF GDS BEE
9041
05/03/99
$637.60
SOUTHSIDE .DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
94415
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$10.15
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD MI
94416
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS MIX
05/03/99
$1,328.25
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
94417
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$87.35
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
94418
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$72.90
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
94561
FRED RICHARDS
CST OF GDS BEE
9041
05/03/99
$1,749.90
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
94638
BOTH ST SELLIN
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99 -
$2,998.55
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
94641
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$607.50
SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS I
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
94768
YORK SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
< *>
$9,440.70*
199508
05/03/99
$399.38
SPECIALIZED GRAPHICS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
4607
PUMP & LIFT ST
GENERAL SUPPLI
1545
< *>
$399.38*
199509
05/03/99
$213.55
SPS
Thermostat
3191129
BOTH ST OCCUPA
REPAIR PARTS
1947
05/03/99
$8.02
SPS
TOOLS
3193030
BUILDING MAINT
TOOLS
05/03/99
$14.24.
SPS
REPAIR PARTS
3198350
BUILDING MAINT
REPAIR PARTS-
2108
05/03/99
$443.23
SPS
Supplies
3198354
CLUB HOUSE
GENERAL SUPPLI
2117
< *>
$679.04*
199510
05/03/99
$2,767.16
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
Prof sery
31178
PLANNING
PROF SERVICES
05/03/99
$13,226.34
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
Prof eng sery
32545
CONTINGENCIES
DUES &.SUBSCRI
05/03/99
$4,757.16
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
Prof eng sery
32585
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
CIP
05/03/99
$149.50
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
Prof eng sery
32682
W 77TH ST PENT
CIP
05/03/99
$1,918.91
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
Prof eng sery
32693
COMPUTER & 77T
CIP
< *>
$22,819.07*
199511
05/03/99
$814.73
ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT CO
Forks
SM05862
EQUIPMENT OPER
GENERAL SUPPLI
2015
< *>
$814.73*
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM--- - - - - -- OBJECT-- - - -
-PO -NUM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199512
05/03/99
$1,740.00
STANDARD HEATING & AIR C
New furnace
042199
CDBG PROG PROF SERVICES
< *>
$1,740.00*
199513
05/03/99
$8,750.00
STOREFRONT /YOUTH ACTION
Prof sery
040999
HUMAN RELATION PROF SERVICES
< *>
$8,750.00*
199514
05/03/99
$35.00
Stouten, Jackie
Program
052599
ED ADMINISTRAT PRO SVC OTHER
< *>
$35.00*
199515
05/03/99
$702.48.
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
CVCB3431
EQUIPMENT OPER CONTR REPAIRS
1759
< *>
$702.48*
199516
05/03/99
$223.37
SUBURBAN PROPANE
OFFICE SUPPLIES
041799
ARENA ICE MAIN OFFICE SUPPLIE
< *>
$223.37*
199517
05/03/99
$210.80
SUN MOUNTAIN SPORTS INC.
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
520365
PRO SHOP COST OF GDS -PR
6335
< *>
$210.80*
199518
05/03/99
$48.10
Sun Newspapers
ADVERTISING LEGAL
204105
ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING LE
05/03/99
$33.80
Sun Newspapers
ADVERTISING LEGAL
205651
ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING LE
05/03/99
$1,900.00
Sun Newspapers
Help wanted ads
207040
CENT SVC GENER ADVERT PERSONL
05/03/99
$74.10
Sun Newspapers
ADVERTISING LEGAL
208540
ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING LE
05/03/99
$97.50
Sun Newspapers
ADVERTISING LEGAL
208541
ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING LE
05/03/99
$83.85
Sun Newspapers
ADVERTISING LEGAL
208542
ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING LE
05/03/99
$111.80
Sun Newspapers
ADVERTISING LEGAL
208543
ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING LE
05/03/99
$37.40
Sun Newspapers
ADVERTISING LEGAL
209080
ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING LE
05/03/99
$27.30
Sun Newspapers
ADVERTISING LEGAL
211003
ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING LE
< *>
$2,413.85*
199519
05/03/99
$315.00
SUNDIN, ROSALIE
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES
05/03/99
$393.00
SUNDIN, ROSALIE
AC service media
042399
MEDIA LAB PR- CASH -99
< *>
$708.00*
199520
05/03/99
$155.83
SuperAmerica
GENERAL SUPPLIES
041599
GENERAL MAINT GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$155.83*
199521
05/03/99
$990.00
Tactical EMS School, The
CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS
041599
POLICE DEPT. G CONF & SCHOOLS
< *>
$990.00*
199522
05/03/99
$66.03
Tape Distributors of Min
GENERAL SUPPLIES
104664
POLICE DEPT. G GENERAL SUPPLI
2052
< *>
$66.03*
199523
05/03/99
$292.20
TERMINAL SUPPLY CO
ACCESSORIES
4365100
EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES
05/03/99
$22.37
TERMINAL SUPPLY CO
ACCESSORIES
4365101
EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES
2248
< *>
1
$314.57*
199524
05/03/99
$106.75
TESSMAN SEED INC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
5021183
GENERAL TURF C GENERAL SUPPLI
2280
< *>
$106.75*
199525
05/03/99
$150.00
THOMPSON MEDICAL SPECIAL
Saw blade bags
51819
FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPLI
1997
< *>
$150.00*
199526
05/03/99
$937.50
THOMPSON, MARK
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES
< *>
$937.50*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (18:53) page 28
CHECK NO
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
199527
05/03/99
$44.40
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMP
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
153867
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$824.50
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMP
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
158866
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$2,598.85
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMP
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
159584
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$24.20
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMP
COST OF GOODS -SOLD BE
159585
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$230.85
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMP
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
159730
VERNON SELLING
CST OF GDS BEE
05/03/99
$312.00
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMP
COST OF GOODS SOLD BE
159871
GRILL
CST OF GDS BEE
< *>
$4,034.80*
199528
05/03/99
$110.94
TITLEIST
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
2086976
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6333
05/03/99
$153.61
TITLEIST
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
2100477
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6333
05/03/99
$565.20
TITLEIST
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
2109022
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6333
05/03/99
$3,826.74
TITLEIST
COST OF GOODS -PRO S
2114347
PRO -SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
6333
< *>
$4,656.49*
199529
05/03/99
$35.09
TODD, DARRELL
BOOKS & PAMPHLETS 1
041499
FIRE DEPT. GEN
BOOKS & PAMPHL
05/03/99
$31.94
TODD, DARRELL
GENERAL SUPPLIES
041999
FIRE DEPT. GEN
GENERAL SUPPLI
< *>
$67.03*
199530
05/03/99
$375.74
Tommy Hilfiger Golf
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
317036
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9449
05/03/99
$91.69
Tommy Hilfiger Golf
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
324228
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9449
05/03/99
$175.66
Tommy Hilfiger Golf
COST OF GOODS - PRO S
327812
PRO SHOP
COST OF GDS -PR
9449
< *>
$643.09*
199531
05/03/99
$168.00
Tompkins, Meredith
Juried show winner
042399
ART-CNTR PROG
DONATIONS
< *>
$168.00*
199532
05/03/99
$14,385.25
TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS I
Computer upgrade
7495
LIQUOR PROG
MACH. -& EQUIP
2046
< *>
$14,385.25*
199533
05/03/99
$249.10
TRACY /TRIPP FUELS
GASOLINE
66998
MAINT OF COURS
GASOLINE
1217
< *>
$249.10*
199534
05/03/99
$292.29
Trane Parts Center
Sensor
165864
YORK OCCUPANCY
REPAIR PARTS
2010
< *>
$292.29*
199535
05/03/99
$233.23
Transportation Supplies
Brake drum
AA012465
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1484
< *>
$233.23*
199536
05/03/99
$12.31
TREADWAY GRAPHICS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
0097128
DARE
GENERAL SUPPLI
2058
< *>
$12.31*
199537
05/03/99
$151.26
TRI STATE PUMP
REPAIR PARTS
17274
FIELD MAINTENA
REPAIR PARTS
2089
< *>
$151.26*
199538
05/03/99
$160.68
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO
REPAIR PARTS
074717
BUILDING MAINT
REPAIR PARTS
2352
< *>
$160.68*
199539
05/03/99
$38.00
TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO
Oxygen
479122
FIRE DEPT. GEN
FIRST AID SUPP
9765
< *>
$38.00*
199540
05/03/99
$149.10
TWIN CITY SEED CO.
PLANTINGS & TREES
1182
MAINT OF COURS
PLANT & TREES
2195
< *>
$149.10*
199541
05/03/99
$381.31
UNIMED MIDWEST INC.
FIRST AID SUPPLIES
0008978
FIRE DEPT. GEN
FIRST AID SUPP
1984
< *>
$381.31*
VV VLY b.1L
l.L1L.rYr ilGVlJiGll -
�
LO- Atl\ -LJJJ 110TJJ/ l.IQyG L.J
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK-AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT
PO NUM
-----=------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=-----------------------------------------
199542
05/03/99
$819.63
UNITED AGRI PRODUCTS
FERTILIZER
0026234
CENTENNIAL LAK
FERTILIZER
2498
< *>
$819.63*
199543
05/03/99
$404.70
United Electric
GENERAL SUPPLIES
91601800.BUILDING
MAINT
GENERAL SUPPLI
2091
< *>
$404.70*
199544
05/03/99
$7,000.00
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
Geese management
NO 2
MAINT OF COURS
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$7,000.00*
199545
05/03/99
$381.40
US Filter Distribution G
GENERAL SUPPLIES
794956
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPLI
2044
05/03/99
$190.70
US Filter Distribution G
GENERAL SUPPLIES
801258
ARENA BLDG /GRO
GENERAL SUPPLI
2160
< *>
$572.10*
199546
05/03/99
$361.05
US -WEST COMMUNICATIONS -
TELEPHONE
050199
CENT SVC GENER
TELEPHONE
< *>
$361.05*
199547
05/03/99
$9.00
US WEST COMMUNICATIONS
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
CNA90086
POLICE DEPT.• G
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$9.00*
199548
05/03/99
$523.90
US West Dex
TELEPHONE
52076410
ED ADMINISTRAT
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$293.00
US West Dex
TELEPHONE
52221110
CLUB HOUSE
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$55.50
US West Dex
TELEPHONE
52221110
FRED RICHARDS
TELEPHONE
05/03/99
$25.50
US West Dex
TELEPHONE
52220730
FRED RICHARDS
TELEPHONE
< *>
$897.90*
199549
05/03/99
$307.52
VAN PAPER CO.
CLEANING SUPPLIES
262067
CENTENNIAL LAK
CLEANING SUPPL
2494
< *>
$307:52*
199550
05/03/99
.$318:'00
VANTAGE ELECTRIC
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
15508
POOL TRACK GRE
CONTR REPAIRS
2432
05/03/99
$1,424.00
VANTAGE ELECTRIC
New outlets
15526
CLUB HOUSE
REPAIR PARTS
1127
< *>
$1,742.00*
199551
05/03/99
$447.00
VINTAGE ONE WINES
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI
3116
50TH ST SELLIN
CST OF GD WINE
< *>
$447.00*
199552
05/03/99
$214.13
Voss Lighting
Light bulbs
2038844
CITY HALL GENE
REPAIR PARTS
2098
< *>
$214.13*
199553
05/03/99
$133.11
WALSER FORD
Supplies
72562
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1717
05/03/99
$14.84
WALSER FORD
Hose
72722
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1739
05/03/99
$5.79
WALSER FORD.
REPAIR PARTS
72721
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
1741
05/03/99
$255.56
WALSER FORD
Lower control arms
72838
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2001
05/03/99
$62.20
WALSER FORD
Bolts
72856
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2004
05/03/99
$12.53
WALSER FORD
REPAIR PARTS
73114
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2206
05/03/99
$139.90
WALSER.FORD
REPAIR PARTS
73181
EQUIPMENT OPER
REPAIR PARTS
2218
< *>
$623.93*
199554
05/03/99
$46.02
WATERSTREET, -JOAN M
MEETING EXPENSE
042199
POLICE DEPT. G
MEETING EXPENS
< *>
$46.02*
199555
05/03/99
$9,444.00
WCN
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
041599
PATHS & HARD S
PROF SERVICES
< *>
$9,444.00*
199556
05/03/99
$387.50
Weir, Joyce
Ambulance refund
041999
GENERAL FD PRO
AMBULANCE FEES
< *>
$387.50*
COUNCIL
CHECK REGISTER
28-APR-1999 (18:53) page 30
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM OBJECT PO NUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199557
05/03/99
$693.87
Welsh Companies Inc
York store rent
050199
YORK OCCUPANCY PROF SERVICES
< *>
$693.87*
199558
05/03/99
$612.00
WENZEL, KENNETH
AC service
042399
ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES
< *>
$612.00*
199559
05/03/99-
$45.00
WERRE, JIM
Club repair
042699
GOLF PROG MISCELLANOUS
< *>
$45.00*
199560
05/03/99
$228.27
WEST WELD SUPPLY CO.
WELDING SUPPLIES
22454
EQUIPMENT OPER WELDING SUPPLI 1887
05/03/99
$79.37
.WEST WELD SUPPLY CO.
WELDING SUPPLIES
22644
EQUIPMENT OPER WELDING SUPPLI 2256
< *>
$307.64*
199561 05/03/99
199562 05/03/99
199563 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/,99
05/03/99
05/03/99
199564 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
199565 05/03/99
199566 05/03/99
< *>
199567 05/03/99
05/03/99
05/03/99
199568 05/03/99
05/03/99
199569 05/03/99
$25.00 Wild, Anne Refund skating 042099 EDINB /CL PROG LESSON PRGM IN
$25.00*
$96.65 WILSON SPORTING GOODS CO COST OF GOODS - PRO S 1999334 PRO SHOP COST OF'GDS -PR 6325
$96.65*
$673.70
$914.45
$1,756.00
$459.80
$297.40
$1,045.39
$1,314.35
$6,461.09*
- $82.65
- $176.35
$152.50
$81.65
$351.87
$566.55
$320.65
$305.43
$1,519.65*
$150.00
$150.00*
$29.98
$29.98*
$552.00
$200.90
$491.00
$1,243.90*
$766.98
$608.96
$1,375.94*
$447.51
$447.51*
WINE COMPANY, THE
WINE COMPANY, THE
WINE COMPANY, THE
WINE COMPANY, THE
WINE COMPANY, THE
WINE COMPANY, THE
WINE COMPANY, THE
WINE MERCHANTS
WINE MERCHANTS
WINE MERCHANTS
WINE MERCHANTS
WINE MERCHANTS
WINE MERCHANTS
WINE MERCHANTS
WINE MERCHANTS
Wolfe, Kay
WOOLDRIDGE, MARY
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 019824
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 020063
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 020065
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 020066
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 020233
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 020234
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 020254
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 8012
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 8013
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 17314
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 17315
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 17316
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 17494
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 17495
COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 17496
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST -OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF.GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
AC service 042399. ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES
GENERAL SUPPLIES 042399
WORLD CLASS WINES INC COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 81019
WORLD CLASS WINES INC COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 81020
WORLD CLASS WINES INC COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 81211
Xerox Coproration
Xerox Coproration
F.i:4ciG),KKe)GWO "IN S *)dI
PRO SHOP GENERAL SUPPLI
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
, VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WINE
YORK SELLING CST OF GD WINE
Xerox monthly use 06801148 CENT SVC GENER EQUIP RENTAL 3413
SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU 06809738 POLICE DEPT. G SVC CONTR EQUI
GENERAL SUPPLIES 16845417 CENT SVC GENER GENERAL SUPPLI 2192
COUNCIL
CHEF._ REGISTER
28- APR -1999 (1..:53) page 31
CHECK NO
DATE
CHECK AMOUNT
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
INVOICE
PROGRAM
OBJECT PO NUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
199570
05/03/99
$260.10
Your Community Timesaver ADVERTISING OTHER
20020
GOLF DOME
ADVERT OTHER
< *>
$260.10*
199571
05/03/99
$59.00
ZD Journals
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
I:107399
MEDIA LAB
DUES & SUBSCRI
< *>
$59.00*
199572
05/03/99
$156.42
ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
54063428
ARENA ADMINIST
SAFETY EQUIPME
< *>
$156.42*
•
199573
05/03/99
$3,077.58
ZIEGLER INC
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
E2418203
DISTRIBUTION
CONTR REPAIRS
< *>
$3,077.58*
$1,046,654.52*
1
3
.I
COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 28- APR -1999 (18:56) page 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FUND # 10 GENERAL FUND $282,107.27
FUND # 11 COMMUNITY DEVELP. BLOCK GR $26,982.85
FUND # 12 COMMUNICATIONS $19,714.31
FUND # 15 WORKING CAPITAL $4,734.10
FUND # 23 ART CENTER $14,519.46
FUND # 25 GOLF DOME FUND $1,776.10
FUND # 26 SWIMMING POOL FUND $1,061.13
FUND # 27 GOLF COURSE FUND $127,679.92
FUND # 28 ICE ARENA FUND $3,713.22
FUND # 30 EDINBOROUGH /CENTENNIAL LAK $12,965.82
FUND # 40 UTILITY FUND $244,181.15
FUND # 41 STORM SEWER UTILITY FUND $4,250.08
FUND # 42 RECYCLING PROGRAM $19.13
FUND # 50 LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND $235,041.41
FUND # 60 CONSTRUCTION FUND $37,298.57
FUND # 61 PARK BOND FUND $30,610.00
$1,046,654.52*