Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-17 City Council Meeting Packet Meeting location: Edina City Hall Council Chambers 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, December 17, 2024 7:00 PM Participate in the meeting: Watch the meeting on cable TV or YouTube.com/EdinaTV. Provide feedback during Community Comment by calling 312-535- 8110. Enter access code 2631 609 4429. Password is 5454. Press *3 on your telephone keypad when you would like to get in the queue to speak. A staff member will unmute you when it is your turn to speak. Accessibility Support: The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927- 8861 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Approval of Meeting Agenda 5. Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Mayor will invite residents to share issues or concerns that are not scheduled for a future public hearing. Items that are on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Mayor may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to respond to their comments tonight. The City Manager will respond to questions raised during Community Comments at the next meeting. 5.1. City Manager's Response to Community Comments 6. Adoption of Consent Agenda All agenda items listed on the Consent Agenda will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of items unless requested to be removed by a Council Member. If removed the item will be considered immediately following the adoption of the Consent Agenda. (Favorable roll call vote of majority of Council Members present to approve, unless otherwise noted in consent item.) 6.1. Minutes: Work Session and Regular for December 3, 2024 6.2. Payment of Claims Page 1 of 1086 6.3. Ordinance No. 2024-12 Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code, Setting Fees for 2025 6.4. Legal Services Agreement with Leach Law Office, LLC 6.5. Request for Purchase: Architectural and Engineering Services for Fred Richards Park Facility 6.6. Request for Purchase: Sonetics Portable Wireless System 6.7. Encroachment Agreement with 4113 Kipling Avenue 6.8. Request for Purchase: Electric Vehicle Chargers for Fire Station 2 6.9. Request for Purchase: Furniture for Fire Station 2 6.10. Request for Purchase: Physical Conditioning Equipment for Fire Station 2 6.11. Request for Purchase: Professional Services for South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements 6.12. Resolution No. 2024-119: Setting Ambulance and Miscellaneous Fire Fees for 2025 6.13. Request for Purchase: 2025 Mental Health and Resiliency Program Contract for Fire Department 6.14. Approve First Amendment of Antenna Lease Agreement 6.15. Approve Contract for Government Relations Services for the 2025 Legislative Session Representation 6.16. 2025 Board and Commission Reappointments 6.17. Approve Temporary Intoxicating On-Sale Liquor License for Northwest Tonka Lions Club 6.18. Approve New On-Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License for Fired Up Pizzeria Inc., dba Fired Up Pizzeria 6.19. Summary Publications for Ordinance Nos. 2024-08 and 2024-09 7. Special Recognitions and Presentations 7.1. Tree Recognition Campaign Awards 8. Public Hearings During "Public Hearings," the Mayor will ask for public testimony after staff and/or Page 2 of 1086 applicants make their presentations. The following guidelines are in place to ensure an efficient, fair, and respectful hearing; limit your testimony to three minutes and to the matter under consideration; the Mayor may modify times, as deemed necessary; avoid repeating remarks or points of view made by previous speakers. The use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. 8.1. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial of a Variance Request at 5605 McGuire Road 8.2. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 2024-117: Vacating Right-of-Way Easement at 5805 Mait Lane 8.3. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 2024-116: Vacating Right-of-Way Easement at 7250 France Avenue 9. Reports/Recommendations: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) 9.1. Resolution No. 2024-118: Accepting Donations 9.2. Ordinance 2024-13: Amending Efficient Building Benchmarking 9.3. Resolution Nos. 2024-107 & 2024-108: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances for 6016 Vernon Avenue 9.4. Resolution No. 2024-115: Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway and Alley Reconstruction, Improvement Nos. BA-466 and A-293 9.5. American Rescue Plan Act Spending Plan Update 9.6. Resolution No. 2024-110: Setting 2025 Tax Levy and Adopting Operating Budget, Approve 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Plan 9.7. Approve 2025 Edina Historical Society Service Agreement 10. Commission Correspondence (Minutes and Advisory Communication) 10.1. Minutes: Human Rights and Relations Commission, October 16, 2024 11. Manager's Comments 12. Mayor and Council Comments 13. Adjournment Page 3 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.1 Prepared By: Sharon Allison, City Clerk Item Type: Minutes Department: Administration Item Title: Minutes: Work Session and Regular for December 3, 2024 Action Requested: Approve minutes as presented. Information/Background: Supporting Documentation: 1. Minutes: Work Session Dec. 3, 2024 2. Minutes: Regular Dec. 3, 2024 Page 4 of 1086 Page 1 MINUTES OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION COMMUNITY ROOM, CITY HALL TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2024 5:30 P.M. 1.0 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. 2.0 ROLL CALL Answering rollcall were Members Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, and Mayor Hovland. Staff in attendance: Scott Neal, City Manager (virtual); Ari Lenz, Assistant City Manager; Zoe Johnson, City Management Fellow; Brian Olson, Public Works Director; Ryan Browning, I.T. Director; Perry Vetter, Parks & Recreation Director; Police Chief Todd Milburn; Fire Chief Andrew Slama; Chad Milner, Engineering Director; Derik Otten, Facility Manager; Cary Teague, Community Development Director; Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager; Stephanie Hawkinson, Affordable Housing Development Manager; Jennifer Bennerotte, Communication Director; and Sharon Allison, City Clerk. 3.1 2025-2030 CIP and 2025 Budget Manager Neal gave an overview of the process the City takes in approving a CIP and budget and encouraged the Council to think of this as an investment for key facilities and staff. Finance Director Thao presented information to the Council on the 2025 CIP, Budget, and Final Levy including: the timeline; the requirement by the State to adopt and certify the final levy; comparison of Edina to other jurisdictions; comparison between Edina and other area cities; General Fund sources including the subtotals by department; budgeted full-time employee (FTE) counts; details within the 2025-2031 CIP by category and by funding source; projection of the CIP in order to meet maintenance and project needs; possibility for additional bonding as debt services fall off; projections of the City’s Financial Management Plan (FMP); breakdown of the proposed levy increase; reviewed possible reduction options that the Council could consider their impacts; and other possible cost savings. The Council asked questions of staff and discussed the possibility of including a slide in the presentation that showed the percent increase for each of the area cities; the importance of discussing asset preservation as part of the CIP discussion; whether residents should expect an average of a 9.5% to 10% increase in the projects year on year and if so, the importance of having additional commentary on how the City comes up with the projections; lack of understanding surrounding the zoning amendments and the costs that were associated with it; concerns about using reserve funds for something other than one-time costs; rules around use of reserve funds and how the funds would be able to be replenished; ways to communicate to the public what happens when there is a budget surplus, for example, last year when there wasn’t as much snow plowing as usual; possibility of projects being pushed out and ending up costing more than the current amounts due to inflation; importance of evaluating the cold storage site to ensure that continued use would be safe if they delay this project; past discussions related to Lewis Park; age of the existing shelter; past park shelter replacement projects and how they were paid for; possible grant opportunities for park building replacements; staffing practices for ambulance and fire response in the City; whether 6 additional paramedic firefighters were required to be able to address the internal shift mandates that forced staff to stay on duty due to a sick call 23 times in 2024; expectations of residents regarding response times; recent difficulty in filling overtime shifts; historic data regarding response times; increase in the levy over the last 10 years; importance of discussion at the retreat to understand how the City can be run as efficiently as possible; concerns about requiring staff to stay on duty when there is a sick call when they have already been on duty for a full shift; starting next year’s budget discussion with what each department ‘wants’; past applications for Safer Grants and explaining the selection process to the public; possibility of finding some costs savings within construction fund and the equipment levy; recent increases in equipment costs; possibility of shifting things back further than 2025 for equipment costs; the possibility of decreasing the proposed budget increase Page 5 of 1086 Minutes/Edina City Council Work Session/December 3, 2024 Page 2 for the Edina Historical Society; what the financial project would be for using reserves to pay for the zoning amendment and cold storage site, delaying Lewis Park, hiring the firefighters, and also adopting a 1% General Fund service cut; need for the City to figure out what number they can hit for 2025 and set a target for 2026 so every department, beginning on January 1st can start looking at ways they can meet that target and find efficient ways for the City to reduce their overall spending; importance of doing a deep dive on what the City is providing on a department by department basis; periodic reports from the departments on what they have found within their budgets that could be changed; concerns about cutting the budget now and what the future implications may be to future budgets; and differences of opinions on the Council about the possibility of delaying Lewis Park. Finance Director Thao noted that the Council did not need to adopt the final 2025 budget until their December 17, 2024 City Council meeting. 3.2 2025 Legislative Platforms – Review of Received Council Feedback Time did allow for discussion of this agenda item. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Allison, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, Dec. 17, 2024. James B. Hovland, Mayor Page 6 of 1086 Page 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 3, 2024 7:00 P.M. I.0 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. 2.0 ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, and Hovland. 3.0 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4.0 MEETING AGENDA – APPROVED Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Pierce, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Motion carried. 5.0 COMMUNITY COMMENT Nora Davis, 6921 Southdale Road, stated that she received a concerning email from her neighbor regarding a fire alarm that went off for 20 minutes the other night at 4040 Southdale Road and hearing shouting and banging. She is concerned that there is nobody there overnight for safety purposes. She recommended that a volunteer security squad be there at night. Janey Weston, 6136 Brookview Avenue, stated her thoughts regarding how the TIF district procedure is handled in the City and thinks that things are going about in the wrong order. 5.1. CITY MANAGER’S RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY COMMENTS City Manager Neal responded to Community Comments from current and past meetings. 6.0 CONSENT AGENDA – ADOPTED Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Agnew, approving the consent agenda as revised to remove Item 6.3, Ordinance No. 2024-12, Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code, Setting Fees for 2025, as follows: 6.1. Approve regular and work session meeting minutes of November 19, 2024, and Canvass minutes of November 14, 2024 6.2. Approve Claims for Payment for Check Register Pre-List Dated November 15, 2024, totaling $2,861,634.16, Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated November 22, 2024, totaling $1,920,000.00, and Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated November 22, 2024, totaling $3,106,117.03, and Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated October 31, 2024, totaling $5,180.87 6.3. Ordinance No. 2024-12, Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code, Setting Fees for 2025 6.4. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-112, Adoption of the 2024 Hennepin County All Hazards Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 6.5. Request for Purchase, Centennial Lakes Park Wayfinding Signage Phase 1, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Archetype at $122,000 6.6. Waive Permit Fees for Centennial Lakes Park Wayfinding Signage Phase 1 6.7. Request for Purchase, Braemar Park Site Improvements Phase 3, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Upper Midwest Athletic Construction at $40,766 6.8. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-104, Setting Parks & Recreation Fees for 2025 6.9. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-105, Approving Grant Application for Metropolitan Council Environmental Services 2025 Private Property Inflow and Infiltration Grant Program Page 7 of 1086 Minutes/Edina City Council/December 3, 2024 Page 2 6.10. Request for Purchase, Professional Services for France Avenue Sidewalk Phase 3 from 60th Street to 62nd Street, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Bolton Menk at $65,133 6.11. Approve 2025 Days of Significance 6.12. Approve 2025 Proposed Commission Work Plans 6.13. Approve Ordinance No. 2024-11, amending City Code Chapter 2 Removing Human Rights & Relations Commission; Approve Human Rights and Engagement Task Force 6.14. Human Services Task Force 2025 Funding Recommendation 6.15. Summary Publication for Ordinance No. 2024-06, Heritage Preservation Commission and Edina Heritage Landmarks and Country Club Plan of Treatment 6.16. Summary Publication for Ordinance No. 2024-07, Adding Planned Unit Development- 25 at 7235 France Avenue 6.17. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-113, Authorizing Cannabis and Substance Use Prevention Grant Project Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Health Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Motion carried. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 6.3. ORDINANCE NO. 2024-12, AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY CODE, SETTING FEES FOR 2025 – FIRST READING GRANTED The Council expressed concerns regarding Chapter 28 for Utilities and whether there should be additional tiers for commercial irrigation accounts. There have been concerns raised by residents that they end up paying a bigger share proportionately compared to what commercial users may pay. Assistant City Manager Lenz updated that staff intends to do a rate study for commercial customers, the rates being set are based on the 2023 Rate Study. The Council considered adding a discussion of these rates as a work item for the retreat in the Spring. The Council asked if there is anything that can be done this year. Finance Director Thao stated that with utility rate studies they take into consideration the infrastructure and capital needs of the different utilities. Member Jackson made a motion to grant First Reading to Ordinance No. 2024-12, amending City Code Chapter 2, Section 2-724 Schedule A, Setting Fees for 2025. Member Pierce seconded the motion. Ayes: Jackson, Pierce, Hovland Nays: Agnew, Risser Motion carried. 7.0 SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS 7.1. RECOGNIZE THE EDINA HIGH SCHOOL BOOY CROSS COUNTRY TEAM – RECOGNIZED Mayor Hovland recognized the Boys Cross Country Team for their State Championship. Assistant Coach Tom Gatyas expressed how proud he is of the team and the seniors on the team who have been such hard workers. The Boys Cross Country Team introduced themselves as follows: Ray Anderson, Ben Boudewyns, Zach Danielson, Jace Haerter, Issak Koivula-Schadow, Rocco Hawthorne, Kevin Nybeck, Sander Ohe, and Torger Ohe. 7.2. 2024 TOM OYE AWARD – PRESENTED DEI Manager Brooks presented a video recognizing Southview Middle School and its partnership with Special Olympics Minnesota for Edina Unified. Human Rights & Relations Commissioner Stringer-Moore welcomed Southview Middle School teachers Jennie Schaefer, Rachel Knaeble, and Whitney Brauchla and presented them with the 2024 Tom Oye Award. Page 8 of 1086 Minutes/Edina City Council/December 3, 2024 Page 3 8.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD – Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. 8.1. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-114, APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS BY THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AND THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL, ACTING JOINTLY, ON BEHALF OF CHILDREN’S HEALTHCARE – ADOPTED It was noted that Member Risser recused herself as a relative was employed by Children’s Healthcare. Finance Director Thao presented information regarding the issuance of revenue bonds. Finance Director Thao stated that there is a Children’s Healthcare Business office in the City of Edina and noted that taking this action results in no risk to the City, the Council must just give host approval. Chief Financial Officer McCormick gave background information regarding what the project entails. The Council asked questions regarding what utilities are involved in serving a server center and what the term “host approval” means. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. Public Testimony Francois Budin, 7217 Oaklawn Avenue, addressed the Council. Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Pierce, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Hovland Abstain: Risser Motion carried. Member Agnew introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2024-114, approving the Issuance of Revenue Bonds by the City of Minneapolis and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, acting jointly, on behalf of Children’s Healthcare. Member Jackson seconded the motion. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Hovland Abstain: Risser Motion carried. 8.2. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-107 & 2024-108, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONING AND SITE PLAN WITH VARIANCES FOR 6016 VERNON AVENUE – CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 17, 2024 Community Development Director Teague presented the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for this site, the existing building, the zoning map, and the proposal to remodel the site into Station Pizzeria Edina. The Council asked questions regarding rezoning to PCD-1 and Section 36-216, the change in use negatively impacting sewer capacity, the change from take-out only to including indoor seating, and challenges with getting 4 units on this site. Community Development Director Teague stated that the project does not comply with the City Code as it stands, so the developers are requesting variances to come into compliance. He stated that these variances would only be applied to this particular site, if approved. Community Development Director Teague also discussed buildable areas and what variances would be needed for things like rooftop dining. The Council expressed concerns about ensuring compliance with the City Code as the project moves forward and the number of variances that have been granted for sites like this in the past. City Attorney Kendall stated that the project does not border two City streets but rather one City street and one County road. Page 9 of 1086 Minutes/Edina City Council/December 3, 2024 Page 4 City Engineer Millner stated that the change from automotive to restaurant would slightly change water use but would be minimal and not impact flows downstream. Community Development Director Teague discussed the Planning Commission's desire to push back the sidewalk from Vernon Avenue to create more green space. The Council asked questions about what alternative uses could be used at this site with a change of zoning to PCD-1 if the Pizza shop does not work out in the future and the site is sold. Community Development Director Teague stated that retail uses, office space, and barber shops would be allowed uses for PCD-1 zoning. The Council asked if the Edina Housing & Redevelopment Authority could write a First Refusal if this was approved to have the opportunity for the City to purchase this property. City Attorney Kendall stated that he is unsure how the HRA could be involved in the purchasing of this property. He stated the City could make an offer to the current owners if they decided they wanted to purchase the property. Traffic Engineer Terhaar stated that he does not see any issues with the access points and the left turns. He stated they looked at turn movement data on Vernon Avenue to determine traffic analysis and what traffic the restaurant will generate at the peak hours of service. Jesse Hamer, Architect at Momentum Design Group, gave background on the project, details of how they landed on their site plan, and insight on parking spaces. Jake Schaffer, property owner, gave clarification on the configuration of the party room. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:31 p.m. Public Testimony Tony Kamp, 6036 Berne Circle, addressed the Council. Bill Katter, 5508 Knoll Drive, addressed the Council. Janey Weston, 6136 Brookview Avenue, addressed the Council. Don Kasbohm, 6128 Hansen Road, addressed the Council. Samuel Reid, 6012 Eden Prairie Road, addressed the Council. Jeff Knapp, 6005 Eden Prairie Road, addressed the Council. Pam Allen, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, #15, addressed the Council. Megan Stone, 6008 Kaymar Drive, addressed the Council. Matthew Pepper, 6004 Eden Prairie Road, addressed the Council. Bob Slaney, 6228 Knoll Drive, addressed the Council. Tracy Pepper, 6004 Eden Prairie Road, addressed the Council. James Allen, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, #15, addressed the Council. Sedona Timm, 6004 Eden Prairie Road, addressed the Council. Page 10 of 1086 Minutes/Edina City Council/December 3, 2024 Page 5 John Wellborn, 6008 Eden Prairie Road, addressed the Council. Barbara Bender, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, #36, addressed the Council. Entienne Laubignat, 6028 Kaymar Drive, addressed the Council. Mary Kenealy-Bredice, 6020 Kaymar Drive, addressed the Council. Lee Azar, 5608 Highwood Drive, addressed the Council. Mary Melander, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, #35, addressed the Council. Karen Rulifson, 5604 Heather Lane, addressed the Council. Marcia Miller, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, #16, addressed the Council. Joan Johnson, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, #13, addressed the Council. Tom Kohlbry, 6004 Kaymar Drive, addressed the Council. Maureen Lannan, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, #14, addressed the Council. Francois Budin, 7217 Oaklawn Avenue, addressed the Council. Robert Melander, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, #35, addressed the Council. Darlene Munson, 6005 Eden Prairie Road, #210, addressed the Council. Brad Fox, 6101 Kaymar Drive, addressed the Council. The Council asked questions of staff regarding what levers are in place to manage the number of seats at a property, the potential to lower the speed limit on Vernon Avenue, the process to enable permit parking, and requiring a contamination study. Community Development Director Teague stated a contamination study was completed on the site. City Engineer Millner stated that if parking became a problem, they would bring the issue to the Traffic Safety Committee first to consider what changes could be made before considering permit parking. The Council asked questions of the property owner regarding operating hours, and capacity at their Minnetonka location. The Council also asked questions regarding whether the granting of variances has a precedential value from one project to another and traffic flow on the property. City Attorney Kendall stated that granting variances on one parcel does not set a precedent for granting a variance on another parcel. Member Pierce made a motion, seconded by Member Agnew, to close the in-person public hearing, keep public comment open until Sunday, December 8, 2024, at noon and continue action to consider approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances for 6016 Vernon Avenue, to the December 17, 2024, City Council meeting. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Motion carried. Page 11 of 1086 Minutes/Edina City Council/December 3, 2024 Page 6 8.3. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-110, SETTING 2025 TAX LEVY AND ADOPTING OPERATING BUDGET, APPROVE 2025-2030 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 17, 2024 City Manager Neal introduced the biennial budget process and proposal. City Manager Neal noted that this budget also makes an investment in people, including adding 3 full-time positions at the Police Department, 6 to the Fire Department, and 1 to the Parks & Recreation Department. Finance Director Thao presented background information on the budget, including the biennial budget process, 2025 Tax Levy, priorities received from Council Retreat, criteria review, Capital Improvement Plan Story Map, how taxation works, taxation process, residential tax calculations – non-homestead, 2025 General Fund, subtotals by department, budgeted FTE, 2025-2030 CIP by categories and funding sources, projection of CIP, bonding, debt service discussion, Financial Management Plan projections, breakdown on levy increase, possible reductions & impact on out year projected levy, estimated market value in Edina, historical tax capacity, 2025 estimated levy impact, property tax history, and 2025 estimated levy impacts. Finance Director Thao discussed details of possible reductions, including a zoning code update, delay of design of cold storage site, delay of Lewis Park to a future year, delay of hiring Paramedic Firefighters to January 2026, and a 1% General Fund service reduction. The Council asked questions regarding where a budget surplus goes and details of the 1% General Fund service reduction and capital equipment reduction. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 10:44 p.m. Public Testimony Liz Ross, 4500 Browndale Avenue, addressed the Council. Janey Weston, 6136 Brookview Avenue, addressed the Council. Nora Davis, 6921 Southdale Road, addressed the Council. Jesse Dovich, 4805 E. Sunnyslope Road, addressed the Council. Dave Frenkel, 4510 Lakeview Drive, addressed the Council. Gordon Stott, 4516 Wooddale Avenue, addressed the Council. Carissa Palm, 5004 Arden Avenue, addressed the Council. Member Pierce made a motion, seconded by Member Jackson, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Motion carried. The Council asked questions regarding the assessment process. City Assessor Shelagh Stoerzinger stated that formulas used to calculate taxes are not just based on the evaluation of a property but also on a classification rate. The Council discussed looking at their expenses and trying to understand those costs to determine how they can optimize them. The Council expressed a desire to do more work earlier in the year to find different options to cut costs rather than waiting until September each year. The Council asked questions regarding the Progress Portal and how it can be accessed by residents. Assistant City Manager Lenz discussed the Progress Portal that gives updates on all the projects from a work plan perspective. Page 12 of 1086 Minutes/Edina City Council/December 3, 2024 Page 7 The Council expressed appreciation for their own Edina dispatch, which is able to provide exceptional care compared to Hennepin County dispatch, and concerns regarding not cutting costs in this area. The Council discussed finding a balance in expenses and making informed decisions about what should and should not be cut. The Council asked if more burden was placed on Edina taxpayers due to the failure in getting the bonding bill from the legislature. City Engineer Millner updated that staff will have to find a way to fund the interchange, so if Edina does not get the State bonding, then the City will use the Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds. Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Agnew, to postpone approval of Resolution No. 2024-110, setting the 2025 Tax Levy and adopting the 2025 Operating Budget, and approving the 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Plan to the December 17, 2024 City Council Meeting. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Motion carried. 9.0 REPORTS / RECOMMENDATIONS 9.1. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-111 ACCEPTING DONATIONS – ADOPTED Mayor Hovland explained that in order to comply with State Statutes; all donations to the City must be adopted by Resolution and approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donations. Member Agnew introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2024-111 accepting various grants and donations. Member Pierce seconded the motion. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Motion carried. 9.2. 2025 EDINA HISTORICAL SOCIETY SERVICE AGREEMENT – CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 17, 2024 Member Pierce made a motion, seconded by Member Agnew, to postpone approval of the 2025 Edina Historical Society Service Agreement to the December 17, 2024 City Council Meeting. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Motion carried. 9.3. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-99, APPROVE SITE PLAN WITH PARKING VARIANCES FOR 3400 EDINBOROUGH WAY APARTMENT CONVERSION – ADOPTED Community Development Director Teague gave a brief overview of the project and details of the applicant’s request to approve the site plan with parking variances to have no enclosed parking. The Council asked questions regarding whether the use of hedges and bushes around the parking lot would result in a higher safety concern. Police Chief Milburn stated that he does not have any concerns regarding the placement of hedges/bushes around the parking lot. Member Jackson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2024-99, approving the Site Plan with Parking Variances for 3400 Edinborough Way. Member Pierce seconded the motion. Ayes: Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Abstain: Agnew Motion carried. 10.0 COMMISSION CORRESPONDENCE (MINUTES AND ADVISORY COMMUNICATION) – Received 10.1. MINUTES: ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION, SEPTEMBER 12, 2024 10.2. MINUTES: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION, OCTOBER 8, 2024 Page 13 of 1086 Minutes/Edina City Council/December 3, 2024 Page 8 11.0 MANAGER’S COMMENTS – Received 12.0 MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS – Received 13.0 ADJOURNMENT Member Pierce made a motion, seconded by Member Jackson, to adjourn the meeting at 11:57 p.m. Ayes: Agnew, Jackson, Pierce, Risser, Hovland Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Allison, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, December 17, 2024. James B. Hovland, Mayor Video Copy of the December 3, 2024, meeting available. Page 14 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.2 Prepared By: Pa Thao, Finance Director Item Type: Claims Department: Finance Item Title: Payment of Claims Action Requested: Provide the action requested of City Council. Information/Background: If you can complete the background in four short paragraphs, you will only need to create an item report. Supporting Documentation: 1. Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 11.27.2024 TOTAL $1,246,445.71 2. Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 12.06.2024 TOTAL $3,224,272.83 Page 15 of 1086 Page 16 of 1086 Page 17 of 1086 Page 18 of 1086 Page 19 of 1086 Page 20 of 1086 Page 21 of 1086 Page 22 of 1086 Page 23 of 1086 Page 24 of 1086 Page 25 of 1086 Page 26 of 1086 Page 27 of 1086 Page 28 of 1086 Page 29 of 1086 Page 30 of 1086 Page 31 of 1086 Page 32 of 1086 Page 33 of 1086 Page 34 of 1086 Page 35 of 1086 Page 36 of 1086 Page 37 of 1086 Page 38 of 1086 Page 39 of 1086 Page 40 of 1086 Page 41 of 1086 Page 42 of 1086 Page 43 of 1086 Page 44 of 1086 Page 45 of 1086 Page 46 of 1086 Page 47 of 1086 Page 48 of 1086 Page 49 of 1086 Page 50 of 1086 Page 51 of 1086 Page 52 of 1086 Page 53 of 1086 Page 54 of 1086 Page 55 of 1086 Page 56 of 1086 Page 57 of 1086 Page 58 of 1086 Page 59 of 1086 Page 60 of 1086 Page 61 of 1086 Page 62 of 1086 Page 63 of 1086 Page 64 of 1086 Page 65 of 1086 Page 66 of 1086 Page 67 of 1086 Page 68 of 1086 Page 69 of 1086 Page 70 of 1086 Page 71 of 1086 Page 72 of 1086 Page 73 of 1086 Page 74 of 1086 Page 75 of 1086 Page 76 of 1086 Page 77 of 1086 Page 78 of 1086 Page 79 of 1086 Page 80 of 1086 Page 81 of 1086 Page 82 of 1086 Page 83 of 1086 Page 84 of 1086 Page 85 of 1086 Page 86 of 1086 Page 87 of 1086 Page 88 of 1086 Page 89 of 1086 Page 90 of 1086 Page 91 of 1086 Page 92 of 1086 Page 93 of 1086 Page 94 of 1086 Page 95 of 1086 Page 96 of 1086 Page 97 of 1086 Page 98 of 1086 Page 99 of 1086 Page 100 of 1086 Page 101 of 1086 Page 102 of 1086 Page 103 of 1086 Page 104 of 1086 Page 105 of 1086 Page 106 of 1086 Page 107 of 1086 Page 108 of 1086 Page 109 of 1086 Page 110 of 1086 Page 111 of 1086 Page 112 of 1086 Page 113 of 1086 Page 114 of 1086 Page 115 of 1086 Page 116 of 1086 Page 117 of 1086 Page 118 of 1086 Page 119 of 1086 Page 120 of 1086 Page 121 of 1086 Page 122 of 1086 Page 123 of 1086 Page 124 of 1086 Page 125 of 1086 Page 126 of 1086 Page 127 of 1086 Page 128 of 1086 Page 129 of 1086 Page 130 of 1086 Page 131 of 1086 Page 132 of 1086 Page 133 of 1086 Page 134 of 1086 Page 135 of 1086 Page 136 of 1086 Page 137 of 1086 Page 138 of 1086 Page 139 of 1086 Page 140 of 1086 Page 141 of 1086 Page 142 of 1086 Page 143 of 1086 Page 144 of 1086 Page 145 of 1086 Page 146 of 1086 Page 147 of 1086 Page 148 of 1086 Page 149 of 1086 Page 150 of 1086 Page 151 of 1086 Page 152 of 1086 Page 153 of 1086 Page 154 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.3 Prepared By: Nelly Chick-Brewer, Assistant Finance Director Item Type: Ordinance Department: Finance Item Title: Ordinance No. 2024-12 Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code, Setting Fees for 2025 Action Requested: Approve Ordinance No. 2024-12 Amending City Code Chapter 2, Section 2-724 Schedule A, Setting Fees for 2025 and grant second reading. Information/Background: Attached is a schedule of fees and charges to be adopted by Ordinance No. 2024-12, proposed for 2025. In summary, fee changes are in the following chapters of City Code: Chapter 8 - Proposed $2 increase in commercial kennel licenses and a $5 increase for daily feeding and care of any veterinarian services and impounding. Chapter 10 – Proposed increases for public swimming pools and whirlpool bath licenses include: $18 increase for enclosed pools, $13 increase for outdoor pools and $8 increase for whirlpool or therapeutic swimming pools and a $35.71 fee establishment for the review of tree protection permit plans. Chapter 12 - Includes a proposed fee increase of $11 for refuse/recycling hauler's license and $5 for each additional vehicle. $2 for health service/salon/massage parlor/escort service license and $50 for tobacco sale license and $20 per THC edible establishment. Chapter 16 - Proposed $3 increase for loudspeaker permits. Chapter 18 – Includes proposed fee increases of $7 for emergency responder radio coverage, $16 for nonbusiness hours inspections, and $14 for sprinkler permits. Chapter 20 – 3% increase for recycling service, food establishment and body art establishment. Chapter 28 – Utilities - The charges for water, sewer, storm water, utility connections, and meters are increasing between 3-8% for 2025 based on the recommendations from the utility rate study initiated by the City and conducted by the City's financial advisor, Ehlers. The fee increases (provided below) are needed to pay for the operational and capital costs of City’s aging utility system and to expand system capacity. Utility Fee 2025 Rate Increases Water User Rates 5% Sewer User Rates 6% Storm Water Rates 8% Water Connection Fee 3% Page 155 of 1086 Sewer Connection Fee 5% Resources/Financial Impacts: A fee change allows us to stay on trend with the changing inflation and standard of living changes year over year. This allows the city to stay in check with the corresponding increases in expenses relating to the various income/service streams. Relationship to City Policies: These fees are essential to our work plan. Supporting Documentation: 1. Ordinance 2024-12- Amending City Code Setting Fees for 2025 Page 156 of 1086 ORDINANCE NO. 2024-12 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE EDINA CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Only the following described fees of Schedule A to City Code Chapter 2, Section 2-724 are amended to read as follows: Chapter and Section Purpose of Fee Charge 8-62 Redemption of impounded animals $40.00 Per day for feeding and care, any veterinarian services and impounding $45.00 Per day for feeding and care, any veterinarian services and impounding 8-115 Commercial kennel license $65.00 Per year $67.00 Per year 10-82 Plan review fee - tree protection permits $35.71 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee (includes supervision, code review, inspections overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) $620.00 Per year for each enclosed pool (partial or all of the year) $638.00 Per year for each enclosed pool (partial or all of the year) $460.00 Per year for each outdoor pool $473.00 Per year for each outdoor pool Public whirlpool bath or therapeutic swimming pool license $240.00 Per year for each bath or pool $248.00 Per year for each bath or pool $375.00 Per year for first vehicle $386.00 Per year for first vehicle $120.00 Per year for each additional vehicle $125.00 Per year for each additional vehicle 12-218 Tobacco sale license $500.00 Per location $550.00 Per location 12-343 Registration for massage therapists $60.00 Per therapist for those businesses exempt from licensure $62.00 Per therapist for those businesses exempt from licensure 12-543 THC Edibles Sales License $700.00 Per THC Edible Establishment $720.00 Per THC Edible Establishment 16-129 Loudspeaker permit 18-64 Emergency Responder Radio Coverage Fee $83.00 $90.00 18-67(a) Operational permits required by MSFC § 105.6. $83.00 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee (includes supervision, code review, inspections overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) $85.00 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee (includes supervision, code review, inspections overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) Nonbusiness hours inspection $134.00 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee $150.00 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee Construction permits required by MSFC § 105.7, except for those covered in this Code in chapter 18, article III, division 5, if total valuation of work is: $1.00 to $500.00 $35.71 *Minimum fee $50.00 *Minimum fee $501.00 to $2,000.00 $35.71 *For first $500.00, plus $50.00 *For first $500.00, plus $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $95.76 *For first $2,000.00, plus $110.00 *For first $2,000.00, plus $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $521.30 *For first $25,000.00, plus $535.00 *For first $25,000.00, plus 18-67(b) Code compliance inspection $83.00 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee (includes supervision, code review, inspections, overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) $85.00 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee (includes supervision, code review, inspections, overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) $1.00 to $500.00 $35.71 *Minimum fee $50.00 *Minimum fee $501.00 to $2,000.00 $35.71 *For first $500.00, plus $50.00 *For first $500.00, plus $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $95.76 *For first $2,000.00, plus $110.00 *For first $2,000.00, plus $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $521.30 *For first $25,000.00, plus $535.00 *For first $25,000.00, plus Hydrant Flow Test Fee $167.00 $170.00 $1.00 to $500.00 $35.71 *Minimum fee $50.00 *Minimum fee $501.00 to $2,000.00 $35.71 *For first $500.00, plus $50.00 *For first $500.00, plus $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $95.76 *For first $2,000.00, plus $110.00 *For first $2,000.00, plus $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $521.30 *For first $25,000.00, plus $535.00 *For first $25,000.00, plus 18-195(b) Other permit-related fees $83.00 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee (includes supervision, code review, inspections, overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) $100.00 Per hour with a minimum one hour fee (includes supervision, code review, inspections, overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) Chapter 10 Chapter 8 2024 Fee Proposed 2025 Fee Chapter 12 12-104 Refuse or recycling hauler's license 10-513(d) Public swimming pool license Chapter 16 $32.00 $35.00 Chapter 18 Page 157 of 1086 Section 2. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be January 1, 2025. First Reading: December 3, 2024 Second Reading: December 17, 2024 Chapter and Section Purpose of Fee Charge $14.50 Per quarter, single family $15.00 Per quarter, single family $14.50 Per quarter, double bungalow $15.00 Per quarter, double bungalow $14.50 Per quarter, apartments/condos (2—8 units) $15.00 Per quarter, apartments/condos (2—8 units) $200.00 Base fee $206.00 Base fee $190.00 Seasonal temporary food stand $195.00 Seasonal temporary food stand $190.00 Seasonal permanent food stand $195.00 Seasonal permanent food stand $250.00 Mobile food unit $258.00 Mobile food unit $140.00 Special event food stand $144.00 Special event food stand Body art establishment license Body art establishment plan review fee Sewer Service: $58.17 Per quarter to and including 8,000 gallons $61.66 Per quarter to and including 8,000 gallons $7.27 Per 1,000 gallons used, whichever is greater $7.71 Per 1,000 gallons used, whichever is greater $58.17 Per quarter to and including 8,000 gallons $61.66 Per quarter to and including 8,000 gallons $7.27 Per 1,000 gallons used, whichever is greater $7.71 Per 1,000 gallons used, whichever is greater $58.17 Per water meter or approved sewage metering device on premises; or $61.66 Per water meter or approved sewage metering device on premises; or $7.27 Per 1,000 gallons used during the quarter, whichever is greater $7.71 Per 1,000 gallons used during the quarter, whichever is greater Water Service: $2.54 Up to 12,000 gallons $2.67 Up to 12,000 gallons $3.86 12,001 to 24,000 gallons $4.06 12,001 to 24,000 gallons $6.38 Over 24,000 gallons $6.70 Over 24,000 gallons Morningside area $4.82 Per 1,000 gallons-Morningside area $5.06 Per 1,000 gallons-Morningside area 2. For multifamily buildings and per 1,000 gallons for areas of city, except in the Morningside area. $3.80 All usage $3.99 All usage $2.54 Up to 50,000 gallons $2.67 Up to 50,000 gallons $3.17 50,001, to 200,000 gallons $3.33 50,001, to 200,000 gallons $3.96 Over 200,000 gallons $4.16 Over 200,000 gallons $3.86 Up to 12,000 gallons $4.06 Up to 12,000 gallons $6.38 Over 12,000 gallons $6.70 Over 12,000 gallons $27.26 Per quarter for up to 3/4-inch meter $28.62 Per quarter for up to 3/4-inch meter $37.18 Per quarter for 1-inch meter $39.04 Per quarter for 1-inch meter $42.38 Per quarter for 11/4-inch meter $44.50 Per quarter for 11/4-inch meter $47.67 Per quarter for 11/2-inch meter $50.05 Per quarter for 11/2-inch meter $76.78 Per quarter for 2-inch meter $80.61 Per quarter for 2-inch meter $291.51 Per quarter for 3-inch meter $306.09 Per quarter for 3-inch meter $371.06 Per quarter for 4-inch meter $389.61 Per quarter for 4-inch meter $470.22 Per quarter for 6-inch meter $493.73 Per quarter for 6-inch meter $597.18 Per quarter for 8-inch meter $627.04 Per quarter for 8-inch meter $3,140.47 Water connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units $3,235.00 Water connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units $2,512.38 Water connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units with 20% reduction with City approval $2,588.00 Water connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units with 20% reduction with City approval $2,355.35 Water connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units with 25% reduction with City approval $2,426.00 Water connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units with 25% reduction with City approval $2,826.74 Sewer connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units $2,968.00 Sewer connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units $2,261.39 Sewer connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units with 20% reduction with City approval $2,374.00 Sewer connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units with 20% reduction with City approval $2,120.06 Sewer connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units with 25% reduction with City approval $2,226.00 Sewer connection charge per REC unit × number of SAC units with 25% reduction with City approval 28-208 28-209 Stormwater drainage charge $51.15 Per quarter pursuant to formula in section 28-208 $55.00 Per quarter pursuant to formula in section 28-208 28-143 Charge for connection to city water or sewer system 1. Residential, except in the Morningside area, per 1,000 gallons, 3. Domestic accounts used by commercial and industrial buildings, including schools and churches 3. Lawn watering accounts used by commercial and industrial buildings, including schools and churches 4. Meter charge Chapter 28 28-43(b) Based upon water usage, the lesser of winter quarter (November 1 to March 1) or actual usage, but no less than 8,000 gallons Based upon water usage, the lesser of winter quarter (November 1 to March 1) or actual usage, but no less than 8,000 gallons 1. Single-family, townhouses, two-family dwellings, apart- ment buildings containing four or less dwelling units 2. Apartment building with more than four dwelling units 3. Commercial and industrial buildings, including schools and churches 20-476 $400.00 $410.00 $400.00 $410.00 Chapter 20 20-218 Recycling service 20-277 Food establishment 2024 Fee Proposed 2025 Fee Page 158 of 1086 Published: Attest ______________________________ _______________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE EDINA SUN CURRENT _______________ SEND ONE AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION BILL TO EDINA CITY CLERK Page 159 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.4 Prepared By: Todd Milburn, Police Chief Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Police Item Title: Legal Services Agreement with Leach Law Office, LLC Action Requested: Approve a one-year agreement with Leach Law Office, LLC, for criminal prosecution legal services. Information/Background: The Leach Law Office provides criminal prosecution legal services to the City. This agreement extends those services through 2025 with no change in terms and no increase in the retainer fee from 2024. The total cost is within budget. Staff recommends approval of the agreement. Resources/Financial Impacts: Within budget. Relationship to City Policies: None Supporting Documentation: 1. 2025 Leach Law Agreement Page 160 of 1086 Page 161 of 1086 Page 162 of 1086 d PURCHASE REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.5 Prepared By: Rachel Finberg, Park Planner Item Type: Request for Purchase Department: Parks & Recreation Item Title: Request for Purchase: Architectural and Engineering Services for Fred Richards Park Facility Action Requested: Approve Request for Purchase for Architectural and Engineering Services for Fred Richards Park Facility with OPN Architects for $281,740. Information/Background: Fred Richards Park, 4400 Parklawn Avenue, the former Fred Richards Executive Golf Course, is being converted to a multi-use park. Site design and program development are underway for the 43 acre site with the project team. The plan calls for a renovation and new building to facilitate park programming and user needs. A public request for qualifications was posted and five firms were evaluated. Staff is recommending a contract with OPN Architects. Requisition Number: 12400270 Funding Source: Local Option Sales Tax Vendor: OPN Architects Equipment Status: New and Replacement Cost: $281,740 Resources/Financial Impacts: This project is funded by the local option sales tax that was implemented by the referendum on November 8, 2022. Project budget is set at $17.7 million. Budget includes an all-inclusive design and build allocation of $3 million for facility renovation and a new facility. Building will be operated and maintained by Edina Parks and Recreation and programming or facility partners. Relationship to City Policies: Fred Richards Park is part of CIP P&R23103. The addition and renovation of facility supports Edina Parks and Trails Strategic plan goals for recreation facility including strategy 1.1 and 1.4. Budget Pillar:Use text snippets to include pillars on the item report. Strong Foundation Page 163 of 1086 Reliable Service Livable City Better Together Values Impact: Engagement The project was engaged in 2016 to identify community needs through outreach. Concepts were presented in 2024 for comments and feedback. Sustainability Facilities will be designed to reflect the Park goals and support City's sustainability goals. SITES and LEED will be pursued with this project. Health Designs and layouts will promote physical and mental health. Accessible connections to nature will be incorporated. Stewardship Designs will reflect city standards and needs for long term sustainability and support. Strategic renovation and re-purposing will allow for budget maximization as well as impact. Equity The project will examine accessibility and needs of regional users as well as community surrounding the site. Barriers will be removed to create a welcoming and high functioning space for all to enjoy. Architectural design will be people centered and reflect the needs of all users. m report. Supporting Documentation: 1. Staff Report: Request for Purchase for Fred Richards Facility 2. OPN Contract 3. OPN Contract Exhibits Page 164 of 1086 StrongFoundationCITY GOALS:BetterTogetherReliableServiceLivableCity St af f Re port City of Edina • 4801 W.50th St.• Edina, MN 55424 Date: To: From: Subject: December 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council Members Rachel Finberg, Park Planner Request for Purchase: Architectural and Engineering Services for Fred Richards Park Facility Staff Recommendation: Approve purchase request for an architectural and engineering contract for the Fred Richards Park Facility in the amount of $281,740 with OPN Architects. Information / Background: The Fred Richards Park master plan was approved on July 18th of 2017. On November 8th 2022 voters approved via referendum a local option sales tax to allocate $17.7 M of project funding for implementation and next phases of the Fred Richards Park master plan. Council’s June 13th, 2023 contract approval of Confluence as a design firm started next steps in implementation process taking 4400 Parklawn Ave., the former Fred Richards Executive Golf Course and transforming it into the 43-acre multi-use park visioned in the approved master plan. The Park will consist of three key areas, the Central Green, Nature Bank and Great Lawn and Panhandle/Loop. Confluence and EOR have been working on landscape and civil design for the 43.5 acre parkland. The new Fred Richards Park includes a large nature area, destination playground, biking and walking trails, Pickleball courts, open space, and numerous other active and passive recreational activities. To accommodate users, the renovation of existing space must include but is not limited to a trailhead for 9 Mile Creek Trail, park programming or public meeting space, ecology and nature learning kiosk, renovated restrooms, and additional storage spaces. This facility will incorporate and aesthetically tie in existing structures and accommodate new service requests including a new roof, reskinning, and upgrades to doors and entrances. Additional parking and civil infrastructure will be provided by Confluence and design team and be coordinated with selected firm. Clubhouse renovation will work with 2,678 SF exiting building and enclose an additional 1,700 SF storage and maintenance space. A new facility design must fit within master plan location. A preliminary square footage of 2,500/3000 SF for food and beverage and community space as well as additional square footage for outdoor restrooms. Page 165 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Request for Qualifications – Professional Architectural and Engineering Services Proposals were sought for professional architectural and engineering (AE) services for Fred Richards Park Facility. The selected firm will work with our Fred Richards Park Project team which is comprised of City staff from multiple departments, Confluence and EOR for site design, and in the near future a Construction Management firm, to provide programming and preliminary design, concept design, schematic design, design development, construction documents and construction administration services. Five firms responded to the request for qualifications. Of the five proposals, three firms were interviewed by city staff. Proposing firms were evaluated on the following proposal and interview criteria: •Firm description and experience •Approach to fulfilling the project objective – including integration of the City’s Values Viewfinder, budget pillars & values, and sustainability goals •Detailed work plan •Fee Schedule City staff completed scoring evaluations. After those evaluations were completed the proposed cost schedule was then reviewed. Firm Non-Cost Considerations (max 325) Cost Considerations (max 35) Total Score (highest = best) (max 335) 10K Architecture 292 26 318 Miller Dunwiddie 285 24 309 OPN 300 35 335 Based on evaluations of both non-cost and cost considerations OPN was ranked as the highest scored firm in all established criteria. OPN Architects has an extensive background in civic and public funded projects. They offer unified people- focused designs. Their portfolio includes projects that reflect their clients goals and objectives focusing on environmental and community needs. Their holistic approach delivers high performing and healthy designs that integrate culture, resilience, health, and community connection. OPN’s approach and values align with Edina’s City goals and values, as well as specific Fred Richards Park goals. Page 166 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 3 Summary Based on a review of proposals that included qualification and interview scoring system, city staff recommends the selection of OPN Architects for the architectural and engineering services for the Fred Richards Park Facility. Page 167 of 1086 Document B133® – 2019 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect, Construction Manager as Constructor Edition Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 1 ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS: The author of this document has added information needed for its completion. The author may also have revised the text of the original AIA standard form. An Additions and Deletions Report that notes added information as well as revisions to the standard form text is available from the author and should be reviewed. A vertical line in the left margin of this document indicates where the author has added necessary information and where the author has added to or deleted from the original AIA text. This document has important legal consequences. Consultation with an attorney is encouraged with respect to its completion or modification. This document is intended to be used in conjunction with AIA Documents A201–2017™, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction; A133–2019™ Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Constructor where the basis of payment is the Cost of the Work Plus a Fee with a Guaranteed Maximum Price; and A134–2019™ Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Constructor where the basis of payment is the Cost of the Work Plus a Fee without a Guaranteed Maximum Price. AIA Document A201™–2017 is adopted in this document by reference. Do not use with other general conditions unless this document is modified. AGREEMENT made as of the 17th day of December in the year 2024 (In words, indicate day, month and year.) BETWEEN the Architect’s client identified as the Owner: (Name, legal status, address, and other information) City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina MN, 55424 and the Architect: (Name, legal status, address, and other information) OPN Architects 212 N. 3rd Avenue Suite 312 Minneapolis, MN 55401 REMIT ALL PAYMENTS TO: OPN Architects, Inc. 200 5th Avenue SE, Suite 201 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401 ATTN: Vickie Choate (vchoate@opnarchitects.com) Becky Ulferts (bulferts@opnarchitects.com) for the following Project: (Name, location, and detailed description) Fred Richards Park Facility 7640 Parklawn Ave, Edina MN Renovation and New Building OPN Project Number: 24723000 The Construction Manager (if known): (Name, legal status, address, and other information) Unknown at time of execution The Owner and Architect agree as follows. Page 168 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 2 TABLE OF ARTICLES 1 INITIAL INFORMATION 2 ARCHITECT’S RESPONSIBILITIES 3 SCOPE OF ARCHITECT’S BASIC SERVICES 4 SUPPLEMENTAL AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES 5 OWNER’S RESPONSIBILITIES 6 COST OF THE WORK 7 COPYRIGHTS AND LICENSES 8 CLAIMS AND DISPUTES 9 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 11 COMPENSATION 12 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 13 SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT ARTICLE 1 INITIAL INFORMATION § 1.1 This Agreement is based on the Initial Information set forth in this Section 1.1. (For each item in this section, insert the information or a statement such as "not applicable" or "unknown at time of execution.") § 1.1.1 The Owner’s program for the Project: (Insert the Owner’s program, identify documentation that establishes the Owner’s program, or state the manner in which the program will be developed.) Architect will develop the program with the Owner, and Owner identified stakeholders, during the Programming and Preliminary Design Phase of work. § 1.1.2 The Project’s physical characteristics: (Identify or describe pertinent information about the Project’s physical characteristics, such as size; location; dimensions; geotechnical reports; site boundaries; topographic surveys; traffic and utility studies; availability of public and private utilities and services; legal description of the site, etc.) Renovation The new Fred Richards Park includes a large nature area, destination playground, biking and walking trails, Pickleball courts, open space, and numerous other active and passive recreational activities. To accommodate users, the renovation of existing space must include but is not limited to a trailhead for 9 Mile Creek Trail, park programming or public meeting space, ecology and nature learning kiosk, renovated restrooms, and additional storage spaces. This facility will incorporate and aesthetically tie in existing structures and accommodate new service requests including a new roof, reskinning, and upgrades to doors and entrances. Additional parking and civil infrastructure will be provided by Confluence and design team and be coordinated with selected firm. Clubhouse renovation will work with 2,678 SF exiting building and enclose an additional 1,700 SF storage and maintenance space. New Building New facility must fit within master plan location. A preliminary square footage of 2,500/3000 SF for food and beverage Page 169 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 3 and community space as well as additional square footage for outdoor restrooms. § 1.1.3 The Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work, as defined in Section 6.1: (Provide total and, if known, a line item breakdown.) Total project budget is $3 million dollars inclusive of all phases of the project from planning to closeout and commissioning. This budget includes construction costs, soft costs, FF&E, and program based needs. Anticipated Construction Cost of Work is $2,600,000 § 1.1.4 The Owner’s anticipated design and construction milestone dates: .1 Design phase milestone dates, if any: Based off AE schedule .2 Construction commencement date: Based off CM schedule .3 Substantial Completion date or dates: Based off CM schedule .4 Other milestone dates: Based off schedule § 1.1.5 The Owner intends to retain a Construction Manager pursuant to the following agreement: (Indicate agreement type.) [ X ]AIA Document A133–2019, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Constructor where the basis of payment is the Cost of the Work Plus a Fee with a Guaranteed Maximum Price. [ ]AIA Document A134–2019, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Constructor where the basis of payment is the Cost of the Work Plus a Fee without a Guaranteed Maximum Price. § 1.1.6 The Owner’s requirements for accelerated or fast-track design and construction, or phased construction are set forth below: (List number and type of bid/procurement packages.) Unknown at time of execution, to be determined later by mutual agreement with Owner § 1.1.7 The Owner’s anticipated Sustainable Objective for the Project: (Identify and describe the Owner’s Sustainable Objective for the Project, if any.) Adhere to City of Edina Sustainable Design Policy § 1.1.7.1 If the Owner identifies a Sustainable Objective, the Owner and Architect shall complete and incorporate AIA Document E234™–2019, Sustainable Projects Exhibit, Construction Manager as Constructor Edition, into this Agreement to define the terms, conditions and services related to the Owner’s Sustainable Objective. If E234-2019 is incorporated into this Agreement, the Owner and Architect shall incorporate the completed E234–2019 into the agreements with the consultants and contractors performing services or Work in any way associated with the Sustainable Objective. Page 170 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 4 § 1.1.8 The Owner identifies the following representative in accordance with Section 5.4: (List name, address, and other contact information.) Rachel Finberg, City of Edina Park Planning Project Manager, and/or her successor, 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 952.826.0397 rfinberg@edinamn.gov § 1.1.9 The persons or entities, in addition to the Owner’s representative, who are required to review the Architect’s submittals to the Owner are as follows: (List name, address, and other contact information.) § 1.1.10 The Owner shall retain the following consultants and contractors: (List name, legal status, address, and other contact information.) .1 Construction Manager: (The Construction Manager is identified on the cover page. If a Construction Manager has not been retained as of the date of this Agreement, state the anticipated date of retention. If the Architect is to assist the Owner in selecting the Construction Manager, complete Section 4.1.1.1) .2 Landscape Architect: Confluence Terry Minarik, Principal 901 N 3rd St #225 Minneapolis, MN 55401 .3 Geotechnical Engineer: Braun Intertec Corporation Jeff Casmer, Project Engineer 11001 Hampshire Ave S Minneapolis MN, 55438 .4 Civil Engineer: Emmons & Oliver Resources (EOR) Jason Naber, Senior Partner Ste 300 1919 University Ave. W St Paul, MN 55104 .5 Other consultants and contractors: (List any other consultants and contractors retained by the Owner.) Security Vendor as Specified by City of Edina Fire Alarm and Sprinkler Vendor as Specified by City of Edina 3rd Party Commissioning Agent 3rd Party Testing and Inspections § 1.1.11 The Architect identifies the following representative in accordance with Section 2.4: (List name, address, and other contact information.) Joseph Wallace Page 171 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 5 212 North 3rd Avenue Suite 312 Minneapolis, MN 55401 jwallace@opnarchitects.com office: 612-355-7111 cell: 612-523-2210 § 1.1.12 The Architect shall retain the consultants identified in Sections 1.1.12.1 and 1.1.12.2 Any other consultants not specifically mentioned in Sections 1.1.12.1 and 1.1.12.2, but retained by the Architect for the completion of the Architect’s services under Article 3 and Section 4.1 of this Agreement shall be retained at the Architect’s sole expense. Should additional consultants be required for completion of the project due to unforeseen conditions or conditions outside of the Architect’s control, additional expense may be negotiated between the Owner and the Architect. All Consultants retained by the Architect shall be qualified professionals and licensed in good standing as required by Applicable Law (defined below in Section 3.1.6). The Architect shall be responsible to the Owner for all work performed by Architect’s consultants: (List name, legal status, address, and other contact information.) § 1.1.12.1 Consultants retained under Basic Services: .1 Structural Engineer: Meyer Borgman Johnson 510 S Marquette Ave Unit 900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 .2 Mechanical Engineer: Emanuelson-Podas, Inc 7705 Bush Lake Rd Edina, MN 55439 .3 Electrical Engineer: Emanuelson-Podas, Inc 7705 Bush Lake Rd Edina, MN 55439 § 1.1.12.2 Consultants retained under Supplemental Services: § 1.1.13 Other Initial Information on which the Agreement is based: § 1.2 The Owner and Architect may rely on the Initial Information. Both parties, however, recognize that the Initial Information may materially change If the Architect identifies a material change such that Architect’s services, schedule for Architect’s services, and the Architect’s compensation may be affected, then the Architect shall submit information regarding that purported material change and any information substantiating the material change to the Owner within thirty (30) days of the event giving rise to the material change for review. The Owner’s budget for Cost of Work, the Owner’s anticipated design, and construction milestones shall not change without written approval from the Owner. If the Page 172 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 6 Architect fails to submit the material change to the Owner within thirty (30) days of the event giving rise to the material change, then the Owner shall have no obligation to change Owner’s budget for Cost of Work, the Owner’s anticipated design, and construction milestones. Owner and Architect shall notify each other of any potential changes in scope which would alter lump sum of contract price. § 1.3 The parties shall agree upon protocols governing the transmission and use of Instruments of Service or any other information or documentation in digital form. The parties will use AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, to establish the protocols for the development, use, transmission, and exchange of digital data. § 1.3.1 Any use of, or reliance on, all or a portion of a building information model without agreement to protocols governing the use of, and reliance on, the information contained in the model and without having those protocols set forth in AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, and the requisite AIA Document G202™–2013, Project Building Information Modeling Protocol Form, shall be at the using or relying party’s sole risk and without liability to the other party and its contractors or consultants, the authors of, or contributors to, the building information model, and each of their agents and employees. ARTICLE 2 ARCHITECT’S RESPONSIBILITIES § 2.1 The Architect shall provide professional services as set forth in this Agreement. The Architect represents that it is properly licensed in the jurisdiction where the Project is located to provide the services required by this Agreement, or shall cause such services to be performed by appropriately licensed design professionals. § 2.2 The Architect shall perform its services consistent with the professional skill and care ordinarily provided by architects practicing in the same or similar locality under the same or similar circumstances. The Architect shall perform its services as expeditiously as is consistent with such professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Project. § 2.3 The Architect shall provide its services in conjunction with the services of a Construction Manager as described in the agreement identified in Section 1.1.5. The Architect shall not be responsible for actions taken by the Construction Manager. The Owner has the authority to approve or disapprove members of the Architect’s team (including all consultants and employees) on the Project, and the Architect will not change any of the members of its team or their roles without the prior written consent of the Owner § 2.4 The Architect shall identify a representative authorized to act on behalf of the Architect with respect to the Project. The Owner has the authority to approve or disapprove members of the Architect’s team (including all consultants and employees) on the Project, and the Architect will not change any of the members of its team or their roles without the prior written consent of the Owner. § 2.5 Except with the Owner’s knowledge and consent, the Architect shall not engage in any activity, or accept any employment, interest or contribution that would reasonably appear to compromise the Architect’s professional judgment with respect to this Project. § 2.6 Insurance. The Architect shall maintain the following insurance until termination of this Agreement. § 2.6.1 Commercial General Liability with policy limits of not less than one million dollars ($ 1,000,000 ) for each occurrence and two million dollars ($ 2,000,000 ) in the aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, products completed operations, personal injury, advertising injury, and contractually assumed liability. The City shall be endorsed as additional insured. § 2.6.2 Automobile Liability covering vehicles owned, and non-owned vehicles used, by the Architect with policy limits of not less than one million dollars ($ 1,000,000 ) combined single limit for bodily injury, death of any person, and property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance and use of those motor vehicles, along with any other statutorily required automobile coverage. § 2.6.3 The Architect may achieve the required limits and coverage for Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability through a combination of primary and excess or umbrella liability insurance, provided such primary and excess or umbrella liability insurance policies result in the same or greater coverage as the coverages required under Page 173 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 7 Sections 2.6.1 and 2.6.2, and in no event shall any excess or umbrella liability insurance provide narrower coverage than the primary policy. The excess policy shall not require the exhaustion of the underlying limits only through the actual payment by the underlying insurers. § 2.6.4 Workers’ Compensation at statutory limits. § 2.6.5 Workers’ Compensation at statutory the Architect agrees to provide workers’ compensation insurance for all its employees in accordance with the statutory requirements of the State of Minnesota. The Architect shall also carry employers liability coverage with minimum limits are as follows: $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Disease per employee $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Disease aggregate $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Accident § 2.6.6 Professional Liability covering negligent acts, errors and omissions in the performance of professional services, with policy limits of not less than one million dollars ($ 1,000,000 ) per claim and two million dollars ($ 2,000,000 ) annual aggregate. § 2.6.7 Additional Insured Obligations. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Architect shall cause the primary and excess or umbrella polices for Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability to include the Owner as an additional insured for claims caused in whole or in part by the Architect’s negligent acts or omissions. The additional insured coverage shall be primary and non-contributory to any of the Owner’s insurance policies and shall apply to both ongoing and completed operations. § 2.6.8 The Architect shall provide certificates of insurance to the Owner that evidence compliance with the requirements in this Section 2.6. . Certificates of insurance acceptable to the Owner shall be filed with the Owner prior to commencement of the Work. These certificates and the insurance policies shall contain a provision that coverage afforded under the policies will not be cancelled or allowed to expire until at least 30 days’ prior written notice has been given to the Owner. ARTICLE 3 SCOPE OF ARCHITECT’S BASIC SERVICES § 3.1 The Architect’s Basic Services consist of those described in this Article 3 and include usual and customary structural, mechanical, and electrical engineering services. Services not set forth in this Article 3 are Supplemental or Additional Services. § 3.1.1 The Architect shall manage the Architect’s services, research applicable design criteria, attend Project meetings, communicate with members of the Project team, and report progress to the Owner. § 3.1.2 The Architect shall coordinate its services with those services provided by the Owner, the Construction Manager, and the Owner’s consultants. The Architect shall be entitled to rely on, and shall not be responsible for, the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of, services and information furnished by the Owner, the Construction Manager, and the Owner’s consultants. The Architect shall provide prompt written notice to the Owner if the Architect becomes aware of any error, omission, or inconsistency in such services or information. § 3.1.3 As soon as practicable after the date of this Agreement, the Architect shall submit, for the Construction Manager’s review and the Owner’s approval, a schedule for the performance of the Architect’s services. The schedule shall include design phase milestone dates, as well as the anticipated dates for the commencement of construction and for Substantial Completion of the Work as set forth in the Initial Information. The schedule shall include allowances for periods of time required for the Owner’s review, for the Construction Manager’s review, for the performance of the Construction Manager’s Preconstruction Phase services, for the performance of the Owner’s consultants, and for approval of submissions by authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. Once approved by the Owner, time limits established by the schedule shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Architect or Owner. With the Owner’s approval, the Architect shall adjust the schedule, if necessary, as the Project proceeds until the commencement of construction. § 3.1.4 The Architect shall submit information to the Construction Manager and participate in developing and revising the Project schedule as it relates to the Architect’s services. The Architect shall review and approve, or take other appropriate action upon, the portion of the Project schedule relating to the performance of the Architect’s services. Page 174 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 8 § 3.1.5 The Architect shall not be responsible for an Owner’s directive or substitution, or for the Owner’s acceptance of non-conforming work, made or given without the Architect’s written approval. § 3.1.6 The Architect shall, in coordination with the Construction Manager, contact governmental authorities required to approve the Construction Documents and entities providing utility services to the Project. The Architect shall respond to applicable design requirements imposed by those authorities and entities. . The Architect’s services shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, codes, regulations, permits, governmental approvals, and other orders of any public authority having jurisdiction over the Project ("Applicable Law"). The Architect acknowledges that the Owner, the Owner’s consultants, and any contractors engaged by the Owner will rely upon the accuracy and integrity of the Construction Documents in the construction of the Project. § 3.1.7 The Architect shall assist the Owner and Construction Manager in connection with the Owner’s responsibility for filing documents required for the approval of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. The Architect will make any required revisions to its Documents as necessary to comply with governmental or utility company requirements at no additional fee or expense to the Owner. § 3.1.8 Prior to the Owner’s acceptance of the Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal, or the Owner’s approval of the Construction Manager’s Control Estimate, as applicable, the Architect shall consider the Construction Manager’s requests for substitutions and, upon written request of the Construction Manager, provide clarification or interpretations pertaining to the Drawings, Specifications, and other documents submitted by the Architect. The Architect and Construction Manager shall include the Owner in communications related to substitution requests, clarifications, and interpretations. The Architect will collaborate and work closely with Owner and Owner’s construction manager (referenced herein as "Construction Manager" or "Contractor") throughout the design process for purposes of estimating the Cost of the Work to comply with the Project Budget. The Architect shall submit Design Documents to Owner and Construction Manager for estimating purposes at the following milestones: (a) at 100% Schematic Design; (b) at 90% Design Development. If the estimated Cost of the Work exceeds the Project Budget, as determined by Owner and Construction Manager at each of the aforementioned milestones, the Architect, at no additional cost to Owner, shall collaborate and work with Owner and Construction Manager to determine and incorporate cost reductions and/or value engineering to reduce the estimated Cost of the Work to be within the Project Budget. The Architect will receive compensation for re-design, only when agreed upon based on scope or budget changes and with an approved proposal. § 3.1.9 As part of the Basic Services, the Architect will include up to (3) additive and deductive alternates in the GMP package (defined below) that, in total, may increase or decrease the Cost of the Work by approximately 5% of the then-current Project Budget. The Architect’s compensation will not change due to of incorporation of such alternates into the Project. The Architect will be responsible for providing complete Construction Documents for these alternates, including detailed Drawings and Specifications. § 3.1.10 The Architect shall be compensated for any Owner initiated scope or budget changes that would increase architects responsibilities. Compensation will be based on hourly contracted amount and be approved based on provided architects proposal. The Owner shall comply with section 5.3 with regards to collaboration and information. § 3.2 Review of the Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Maximum Price Proposal or Control Estimate § 3.2.1 Guaranteed Maximum Price set forth for the Construction Manager will be the cumulative or sum total of all of the competitively bid contracts. At time of public bid package opening, the Construction Manager shall prepare, for review by the Owner and Architect, and for the Owner’s acceptance or approval, a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal or Control Estimate. The Architect shall assist the Owner in reviewing the Construction Manager’s proposal or estimate. The Architect’s review is not for the purpose of discovering errors, omissions, or inconsistencies; for the assumption of any responsibility for the Construction Manager’s proposed means, methods, sequences, techniques, or procedures; or for the verification of any estimates of cost or estimated cost proposals. In the event that the Architect discovers any inconsistencies or inaccuracies in the information presented, the Architect shall promptly notify the Owner and Construction Manager. Page 175 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 9 § 3.2.2 Upon authorization by the Owner, and subject to Section 4.2.1.14, the Architect shall update the Drawings, Specifications, and other documents to incorporate the agreed upon assumptions and clarifications contained in the Guaranteed Maximum Price Amendment or Control Estimate. § 3.3 Schematic Design Phase Services § 3.3.1 The Architect shall review the program, and other information furnished by the Owner and Construction Manager, and shall review laws, codes, and regulations applicable to the Architect’s services. § 3.3.2 The Architect shall prepare a preliminary evaluation of the Owner’s program, schedule, budget for the Cost of the Work, Project site, and other Initial Information, each in terms of the other, to ascertain the requirements of the Project. The Architect shall notify the Owner of (1) any inconsistencies discovered in the information, and (2) other information or consulting services that may be reasonably needed for the Project. § 3.3.3 The Architect shall present its preliminary evaluation to the Owner and Construction Manager and shall discuss with the Owner and Construction Manager alternative approaches to design and construction of the Project. The Architect shall reach an understanding with the Owner regarding the requirements of the Project. § 3.3.4 Based on the Project requirements agreed upon with the Owner, the Architect shall prepare and present, to the Owner and Construction Manager, for the Owner’s approval, a preliminary design illustrating the scale and relationship of the Project components. § 3.3.5 Based on the Owner’s approval of the preliminary design, the Architect shall prepare Schematic Design Documents for Construction Manager’s review and the Owner’s approval. The Schematic Design Documents shall consist of drawings and other documents including a site plan, if appropriate, and preliminary building plans, sections and elevations; and may include some combination of study models, perspective sketches, or digital representations. Preliminary selections of major building systems and construction materials shall be noted on the drawings or described in writing. § 3.3.5.1 The Architect shall consider sustainable design alternatives, such as material choices and building orientation, together with other considerations based on program and aesthetics, in developing a design that is consistent with the Owner’s program, schedule and budget for the Cost of the Work. The Owner may obtain more advanced sustainable design services as a Supplemental Service under Section 4.1. § 3.3.5.2 The Architect shall consider with the Owner and the Construction Manager the value of alternative materials, building systems and equipment, together with other considerations based on program and aesthetics, in developing a design for the Project that is consistent with the Owner’s program, schedule, and budget for the Cost of the Work. § 3.3.6 The Architect shall submit the Schematic Design Documents to the Owner and the Construction Manager. The Architect shall meet with the Construction Manager to review the Schematic Design Documents. § 3.3.7 Upon receipt of the Construction Manager’s review comments and cost estimate at the conclusion of the Schematic Design Phase, the Architect shall take action as required under Section 6.4, and request the Owner’s written approval of the Schematic Design Documents. If revisions to the Schematic Design Documents are required to comply with the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work at the conclusion of the Schematic Design Phase, the Architect shall incorporate the required revisions in the Design Development Phase at no cost to the Owner. § 3.3.8 In the further development of the Drawings and Specifications during this and subsequent phases of design, the Architect shall be entitled to rely on the accuracy of the estimates of the Cost of the Work, which are to be provided by the Construction Manager under the Construction Manager’s agreement with the Owner. § 3.4 Design Development Phase Services § 3.4.1 Based on the Owner’s written approval of the Schematic Design Documents, and on the Owner’s authorization of any adjustments in the Project requirements and the budget for the Cost of the Work, the Architect shall prepare Design Development Documents for the Construction Manager’s review and the Owner’s approval. The Design Development Documents shall be based upon information provided, and estimates prepared by, the Construction Manager and shall illustrate and describe the development of the approved Schematic Design Documents and shall consist of drawings and other documents including plans, sections, elevations, typical construction details, and diagrammatic layouts of building Page 176 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 10 systems to fix and describe the size and character of the Project as to architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical systems, and other appropriate elements. The Design Development Documents shall also include outline specifications that identify major materials and systems and establish in general their quality levels. § 3.4.2 Prior to the conclusion of the Design Development Phase, the Architect shall submit the Design Development Documents to the Owner and the Construction Manager. The Architect shall meet with the Construction Manager to review the Design Development Documents. § 3.4.3 Upon receipt of the Construction Manager’s information and estimate at the conclusion of the Design Development Phase, the Architect shall take action as required under Sections 6.5 and 6.6 and request the Owner’s written approval of the Design Development Documents. § 3.5 Construction Documents Phase Services § 3.5.1 Based on the Owner’s written approval of the Design Development Documents, and on the Owner’s authorization of any adjustments in the Project requirements and the budget for the Cost of the Work, the Architect shall prepare Construction Documents for the Construction Manager’s review and the Owner’s approval. The Construction Documents shall illustrate and describe the further development of the approved Design Development Documents and shall consist of Drawings and Specifications setting forth in detail the quality levels and performance criteria of materials and systems and other requirements for the construction of the Work. The Owner and Architect acknowledge that, in order to perform the Work, the Construction Manager will provide additional information, including Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples and other similar submittals, which the Architect shall review in accordance with Section 3.6.4. § 3.5.2 The Architect shall incorporate the design requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project into the Construction Documents. § 3.5.3 During the development of the Construction Documents, if requested by the Owner, the Architect shall assist the Owner and Construction Manager in the development and preparation of (1) the Conditions of the Contract for Construction (General, Supplementary and other Conditions) and (2) a project manual that includes the Conditions of the Contract for Construction and Specifications, and may include sample forms. § 3.5.4 Prior to the conclusion of the Construction Documents Phase, the Architect shall submit the Construction Documents to the Owner and the Construction Manager. The Architect shall meet with the Construction Manager to review the Construction Documents. § 3.5.5 Upon receipt of the Construction Manager’s information and estimate at the conclusion of the Construction Documents Phase, the Architect shall take action as required under Section 6.7, and request the Owner’s approval of the Construction Documents. The Owner’s review of such Construction Documents is not conducted for the purpose of determining compliance with any laws, ordinances, codes, rules, regulations and requirements of governmental agencies applicable to the Project, and the Owner’s approval of such Construction Documents shall not be deemed to be a certification that the Construction Documents are in accordance with such requirements, as determining such compliance is solely the responsibility of the Architect. The Construction Manager shall update the estimate for the Cost of the Work. If the Owner believes that the estimated Cost of the Work based on the Construction Documents along with additional value engineering and scope definition documents as required and formally agreed on in writing by the Owner will be higher than the contract sum obtained from the Contractor based on the Contract Sum Pricing Documents, along with additional value engineering and scope definition documents as required and formally agreed on in writing by the Owner, the Architect shall, for no additional compensation from the Owner, propose reasonable revisions to the Construction Documents without significantly reducing the character, size, quality, components or general scope of the Project such that the Cost of the Work shall not exceed the contract sum obtained from the Contractor based on the Contract Sum Pricing Documents along with additional value engineering and scope definition documents as required and formally agreed on in writing by the Owner. § 3.5.6 As directed by Owner, the Architect shall assist the Owner, Owner’s Representative and contractor in bidding the Project by: .1 providing [3 to 5] bid packages if Construction Schedule warrants; .2 facilitating the distribution of Bidding Documents to prospective bidders; Page 177 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 11 § 3.5.7 The Architect shall prepare the Construction Documents in accordance with the Requirements. The Architect shall ensure that the Construction Documents comply with Applicable Law. The Architect shall also identify for Owner all applicable governmental approvals, consents, and permits (collectively, the "Permits") that are (a) necessitated by the Construction Documents and (b) required in order for the Owner to fully utilize the Project in accordance with Applicable Law. Architect shall assist the Owner in obtaining all required Permits. § 3.5.8 If requested by the Owner, the Architect’s Construction Documents Phase Services also shall include making a reasonable number of presentations to explain the design of the Project to the Owner, governmental authorities or members of the community that may be impacted by the Project § 3.6 Construction Phase Services § 3.6.1 General § 3.6.1.1 The Architect shall provide administration of the Contract between the Owner and the Construction Manager as set forth below and in AIA Document A201™–2017, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction. If the Owner and Construction Manager modify AIA Document A201–2017, those modifications shall not affect the Architect’s services under this Agreement unless the Owner and the Architect amend this Agreement. The term "Contractor" as used in A201-2017 shall mean the Construction Manager. § 3.6.1.2 Subject to Section 4.2, the Architect’s responsibility to provide Construction Phase Services commences upon the Owner’s acceptance of the Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal, the Owner’s approval of the Construction Manager’s Control Estimate, or by a written agreement between the Owner and Construction Manager which sets forth a description of the Work to be performed by the Construction Manager prior to such acceptance or approval. Subject to Section 4.2, and except as provided in Section 3.6.6.5, the Architect’s responsibility to provide Construction Phase Services terminates on the date the Architect issues the final Certificate for Payment. § 3.6.1.3 The Architect shall advise and consult with the Owner and Construction Manager during the Construction Phase Services. The Architect shall have authority to act on behalf of the Owner only to the extent provided in this Agreement. The Architect shall not have control over, charge of, or responsibility for the construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work, nor shall the Architect be responsible for the Construction Manager’s failure to perform the Work in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Architect shall be responsible for the Architect’s negligent acts or omissions and the negligent acts or omissions of consultants and others employed by the Architect, but shall not have control over or charge of, and shall not be responsible for, acts or omissions of the Construction Manager or of any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. Nothing herein shall relieve the Architect of liability for failing to perform in accordance with the requirements of and standard of care established herein. § 3.6.2 Evaluations of the Work § 3.6.2.1 The Architect shall visit the site at intervals appropriate to the stage of construction, or as otherwise required in Section 4.2.3, to become generally familiar with the progress and quality of the portion of the Work completed, and to determine, in general, if the Work observed is being performed in a manner indicating that the Work, when fully completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents. However, the Architect shall not be required to make exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work. On the basis of the site visits, the Architect shall keep the Owner reasonably informed about the progress and quality of the portion of the Work completed, and promptly report to the Owner (1) known deviations from the Contract Documents, (2) known deviations from the most recent construction schedule submitted by the Construction Manager, and (3) defects and deficiencies observed in the Work. § 3.6.2.2 The Architect has the authority to reject Work that does not conform to the Contract Documents. Whenever the Architect considers it necessary or advisable, the Architect shall have the authority to require inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with the provisions of the Contract Documents, whether or not the Work is fabricated, installed or completed. However, neither this authority of the Architect nor a decision made in good faith either to exercise or not to exercise such authority shall give rise to a duty or responsibility of the Architect to the Construction Manager, Subcontractors, suppliers, their agents or employees, or other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. Page 178 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 12 § 3.6.2.3 The Architect shall interpret and decide matters concerning performance under, and requirements of, the Contract Documents on written request of the Owner. The Architect’s response to such requests shall be made in writing within any time limits agreed upon or otherwise with reasonable promptness. § 3.6.2.4 Interpretations and decisions of the Architect shall be consistent with the intent of, and reasonably inferable from, the Contract Documents and shall be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and decisions, the Architect shall endeavor to secure faithful performance by Construction Manager and shall not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions rendered in good faith. The Owner’s decisions on matters relating to aesthetic effect shall be final if consistent with the intent expressed in the Contract Documents.. § 3.6.2.5 Unless the Owner and Construction Manager designate another person to serve as an Initial Decision Maker, as that term is defined in AIA Document A201–2017, the Architect shall render initial decisions on Claims between the Owner and Construction Manager as provided in the Contract Documents. § 3.6.3 Certificates for Payment to Construction Manager § 3.6.3.1 The Architect shall review and certify the amounts due the Construction Manager and shall issue certificates in such amounts. The Architect’s certification for payment shall constitute a representation to the Owner, based on the Architect’s evaluation of the Work as provided in Section 3.6.2 and on the data comprising the Construction Manager’s Application for Payment, that, to the best of the Architect’s knowledge, information and belief, the Work has progressed to the point indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and that the Construction Manager is entitled to payment in the amount certified. The foregoing representations are subject to (1) an evaluation of the Work for conformance with the Contract Documents upon Substantial Completion, (2) results of subsequent tests and inspections, (3) correction of minor deviations from the Contract Documents prior to completion, and (4) specific qualifications expressed by the Architect. § 3.6.3.2 The issuance of a Certificate for Payment shall not be a representation that the Architect has (1) made exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work, (2) reviewed construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, (3) reviewed copies of requisitions received from Subcontractors and suppliers and other data requested by the Owner to substantiate the Construction Manager’s right to payment, or (4) ascertained how or for what purpose the Construction Manager has used money previously paid on account of the Contract Sum. § 3.6.3.3 The Architect shall maintain a record of the Applications and Certificates for Payment. § 3.6.4 Submittals § 3.6.4.1 The Architect shall review the Construction Manager’s submittal schedule and shall not unreasonably delay or withhold approval of the schedule. The Architect’s action in reviewing submittals shall be taken in accordance with the approved submittal schedule or, in the absence of an approved submittal schedule, with reasonable promptness while allowing sufficient time, in the Architect’s professional judgment, to permit adequate review. § 3.6.4.2 The Architect shall review and approve, or take other appropriate action upon, the Construction Manager’s submittals such as Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. Review of such submittals is not for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other information such as dimensions, quantities, and installation or performance of equipment or systems, which are the Construction Manager’s responsibility. The Architect’s review shall not constitute approval of safety precautions or construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. The Architect’s approval of a specific item shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which the item is a component. § 3.6.4.3 If the Contract Documents specifically require the Construction Manager to provide professional design services or certifications by a design professional related to systems, materials, or equipment, the Architect shall specify the appropriate performance and design criteria that such services must satisfy. The Architect shall review and take appropriate action on Shop Drawings and other submittals related to the Work designed or certified by the Construction Manager’s design professional, provided the submittals bear such professional’s seal and signature when submitted to the Architect. The Architect’s review shall be for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. The Architect shall be entitled to rely upon, and shall not be responsible for, the adequacy and accuracy of the services, certifications, and approvals performed or provided by such design professionals. Page 179 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 13 § 3.6.4.4 Subject to Section 4.2, the Architect shall review and respond to requests for information about the Contract Documents. The Architect shall set forth, in the Contract Documents, the requirements for requests for information. Requests for information shall include, at a minimum, a detailed written statement that indicates the specific Drawings or Specifications in need of clarification and the nature of the clarification requested. The Architect’s response to such requests shall be made in writing within any time limits agreed upon, or otherwise with reasonable promptness. If appropriate, the Architect shall prepare and issue supplemental Drawings and Specifications in response to the requests for information. § 3.6.4.5 The Architect shall maintain a record of submittals and copies of submittals supplied by the Construction Manager in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. § 3.6.5 Changes in the Work § 3.6.5.1 The Architect may order minor changes in the Work that are consistent with the intent of the Contract Documents and do not involve an adjustment in the Contract Sum or an extension of the Contract Time. Subject to Section 4.2, the Architect shall prepare Change Orders and Construction Change Directives for the Owner’s approval and execution in accordance with the Contract Documents, including the evaluation of change order requests and proposals. § 3.6.5.2 The Architect shall maintain records relative to changes in the Work. § 3.6.6 Project Completion § 3.6.6.1 The Architect shall: .1 conduct inspections to determine the date or dates of Substantial Completion and the date of final completion; .2 issue Certificates of Substantial Completion; .3 forward to the Owner, for the Owner’s review and records, written warranties and related documents required by the Contract Documents and received from the Construction Manager; and .4 issue a final Certificate for Payment based upon a final inspection indicating that, to the best of the Architect’s knowledge, information, and belief, the Work complies with the requirements of the Contract Documents. § 3.6.6.2 The Architect’s inspections shall be conducted with the Owner to (1) check conformance of the Work with the requirements of the Contract Documents and (2) verify the accuracy and completeness of the list submitted by the Construction Manager of Work to be completed or corrected. § 3.6.6.3 When Substantial Completion has been achieved, the Architect shall inform the Owner about the balance of the Contract Sum remaining to be paid the Construction Manager, including the amount to be retained from the Contract Sum, if any, for final completion or correction of the Work. § 3.6.6.4 The Architect shall forward to the Owner the following information received from the Construction Manager: (1) consent of surety or sureties, if any, to reduction in or partial release of retainage or the making of final payment; (2) affidavits, receipts, releases and waivers of liens, or bonds indemnifying the Owner against liens; and (3) any other documentation required of the Construction Manager under the Contract Documents. § 3.6.6.5 Upon request of the Owner, and prior to the expiration of one year from the date of Substantial Completion, the Architect shall, without additional compensation, conduct a meeting with the Owner to review the facility operations and performance, and shall provide a list of defects in the Project to the Owner at least two weeks prior to the one-year anniversary of the date of Substantial Completion. . ARTICLE 4 SUPPLEMENTAL AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES § 4.1 Supplemental Services § 4.1.1 The services listed below are not included in Basic Services but may be required for the Project. The Architect shall provide the listed Supplemental Services only if specifically designated in the table below as the Architect’s responsibility, and the Owner shall compensate the Architect as provided in Section 11.2. Unless otherwise specifically Page 180 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 14 addressed in this Agreement, if neither the Owner nor the Architect is designated, the parties agree that the listed Supplemental Service is not being provided for the Project. (Designate the Architect’s Supplemental Services and the Owner’s Supplemental Services required for the Project by indicating whether the Architect or Owner shall be responsible for providing the identified Supplemental Service. Insert a description of the Supplemental Services in Section 4.1.2 below or attach the description of services as an exhibit to this Agreement.) Supplemental Services Responsibility (Architect, Owner, or not provided) § 4.1.1.1 Assistance with Selection of Construction Manager Owner § 4.1.1.2 Programming Architect § 4.1.1.3 Multiple Preliminary Designs Architect § 4.1.1.4 Measured drawings § 4.1.1.5 Existing facilities surveys Owner § 4.1.1.6 Site evaluation and planning Confluence § 4.1.1.7 Building Information Model management responsibilities Architect § 4.1.1.8 Development of Building Information Models for post construction use Architect § 4.1.1.9 Civil engineering Confluence § 4.1.1.10 Landscape design Confluence § 4.1.1.11 Architectural interior design Architect § 4.1.1.12 Value analysis Architect § 4.1.1.13 Cost estimating Architect coordinate with CMAR § 4.1.1.14 On-site project representation CMAR § 4.1.1.15 Conformed documents for construction Architect § 4.1.1.16 As-designed record drawings Architect § 4.1.1.17 As-constructed record drawings Architect with as-built documentation from CMAR § 4.1.1.18 Post-occupancy evaluation Owner § 4.1.1.19 Facility support services Owner § 4.1.1.20 Tenant-related services Owner § 4.1.1.21 Architect’s coordination of the Owner’s consultants As needed § 4.1.1.22 Telecommunications/data design Architect Coordinated § 4.1.1.23 Security evaluation and planning Architect Coordinated § 4.1.1.24 Commissioning Owner, As needed § 4.1.1.25 Sustainable Project Services pursuant to Section 4.1.3 City Sustainable Design Policy - Architect § 4.1.1.26 Historic preservation N/A § 4.1.1.27 Furniture, furnishings, and equipment design Architect § 4.1.1.28 Other services provided by specialty Consultants Negotiated As needed § 4.1.1.29 Other Supplemental Services Negotiated As needed § 4.1.2 Description of Supplemental Services § 4.1.2.1 A description of each Supplemental Service identified in Section 4.1.1 as the Architect’s responsibility is provided below. (Describe in detail the Architect’s Supplemental Services identified in Section 4.1.1 or, if set forth in an exhibit, identify the exhibit. The AIA publishes a number of Standard Form of Architect’s Services documents that can be included as an exhibit to describe the Architect’s Supplemental Services.) Page 181 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 15 .1 AE to provide structural, mechanical, electrical. .2 AE to provide specifications, layouts, procurement, installation, punch list and overall management of all FFE vendors including bidding out to multiple vendors as required for building scope indicated in 1.1.2 . .3 AE to coordinate with City’s preferred vendors for IT, AV, and FFE. .4 Commissioning if needed will be 3rd party. § 4.1.2.2 A description of each Supplemental Service identified in Section 4.1.1 as the Owner’s responsibility is provided below. (Describe in detail the Owner’s Supplemental Services identified in Section 4.1.1 or, if set forth in an exhibit, identify the exhibit.) § 4.1.3 If the Owner identified a Sustainable Objective in Article 1, the Architect shall provide, as a Supplemental Service, the Sustainability Services required in AIA Document E234™–2019, Sustainable Projects Exhibit, Construction Manager as Constructor Edition, attached to this Agreement. The Owner shall compensate the Architect as provided in Section 11.2. § 4.2 Architect’s Additional Services The Owner may request the Architect to provide Additional Services after execution of this Agreement without invalidating the Agreement (in which case the Architect shall not be entitled to additional compensation or an adjustment in the Architect’s schedule for such services). Except for services required due to the fault of the Architect, any Additional Services provided in accordance with this Section 4.2 shall entitle the Architect to compensation pursuant to Section 11.3 and an appropriate adjustment in the Architect’s schedule. No claims for Additional Services shall be made unless the Owner is notified prior to the Architect rendering such services and such services are approved by the Owner in writing. Approved Additional Services shall be billed in accordance with Section 11.10.2. Failure to strictly comply with these requirements shall constitute a waiver of any claim for such Additional Services. § 4.2.1 Upon recognizing the need to perform the following Additional Services, the Architect shall notify the Owner in writing with reasonable promptness, but in any event no later than thirty (30) days from the event necessitating Additional Services, and explain the facts and circumstances giving rise to the need. The Architect shall not proceed to provide the following Additional Services until the Architect receives the Owner’s written authorization: .1 Services necessitated by a change in the Initial Information, previous instructions or recommendations given by the Construction Manager or the Owner, approvals given by the Owner, or a material change in the Project including size, quality, complexity, the Owner’s schedule or budget for Cost of the Work, or bid packages in addition to those listed in Section 1.1.6; .2 Making revisions in Drawings, Specifications, or other documents (as required pursuant to Section 6.7), when such revisions are required because the Construction Manager’s estimate of the Cost of the Work, Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal, or Control Estimate exceeds the Owner’s budget, except where such excess is due to changes initiated by the Architect in scope, capacities of basic systems, or the kinds and quality of materials, finishes, or equipment; .3 Services necessitated by the enactment or revision of codes, laws, or regulations, including changing or editing previously prepared Instruments of Service; .4 Changing or editing previously prepared Instruments of Service necessitated by official interpretations of applicable codes, laws or regulations that are either (a) contrary to specific interpretations by the applicable authorities having jurisdiction made prior to the issuance of the building permit, or (b) contrary to requirements of the Instruments of Service when those Instruments of Service were prepared in accordance with the applicable standard of care; .5 Services necessitated by decisions of the Owner or Construction Manager not rendered in a timely manner or any other failure of performance on the part of the Owner or the Owner’s consultants or contractors; .6 Preparing digital models or other design documentation for transmission to the Owner’s consultants and contractors, or to other Owner- authorized recipients; Page 182 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 16 .7 Preparation of design and documentation for alternate bid or proposal requests proposed by the Owner or Construction Manager; .8 Preparation for, and attendance at an unreasonable number of, public presentations, meetings or hearings; .9 Preparation for, and attendance at, a dispute resolution proceeding or legal proceeding, except where the Architect is party thereto; .10 Consultation concerning replacement of Work resulting from fire or other cause during construction; or .11 Assistance to the Initial Decision Maker, if other than the Architect; .12 Services necessitated by replacement of the Construction Manager or conversion of the Construction Manager as constructor project delivery method to an alternative project delivery method; .13 Services necessitated by the Owner’s delay in engaging the Construction Manager; .14 Making revisions to the Drawings, Specifications, and other documents resulting from agreed-upon assumptions and clarifications included in the Guaranteed Maximum Price Amendment or Control Estimate; and .15 Making revisions to the Drawings, Specifications, and other documents resulting from substitutions included in the Guaranteed Maximum Price Amendment or Control Estimate. § 4.2.2 To avoid delay in the Construction Phase, upon recognizing the need to perform the following Additional Services, the Architect shall , notify the Owner with reasonable promptness, , but in any event no later than thirty (30) days from the event necessitating Additional Services, and explain the facts and circumstances giving rise to the need. If, upon receipt of the Architect’s notice, the Owner determines that all or parts of the services are not required, the Owner shall give prompt written notice to the Architect of the Owner’s determination. The Architect shall not proceed with providing the Additional Services until Architect’s receipt of the Owner’s written authorization : .1 Intentionally deleted. .2 Responding to the Construction Manager’s requests for information that are not prepared in accordance with the Contract Documents or where such information is available to the Construction Manager from a careful study and comparison of the Contract Documents, field conditions, other Owner-provided information, Construction Manager-prepared coordination drawings, or prior Project correspondence or documentation; .3 Intentionally deleted. .4 Evaluating an extensive number of Claims as the Initial Decision Maker; or .5 Intentionally deleted § 4.2.3 The Architect shall provide Construction Phase Services exceeding the limits set forth below as Additional Services. When the limits below are reached, the Architect shall notify the Owner: .1 Two ( 2 ) reviews of each Shop Drawing, Product Data item, sample and similar submittals of the Construction Manager .2 One ( 1 ) visit per month to the site by the Architect during construction, except that Architect will provide additional site visits as needed to resolve all issues related to errors and omissions in the Construction Documents without any additional compensation from Owner .3 Two ( 2 ) inspections for any portion of the Work to determine whether such portion of the Work is substantially complete in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents .4 One ( 1 ) inspections for any portion of the Work to determine final completion .5 Attendance or representation at all weekly Owner-Architect-Contractor meetings § 4.2.4 Except for services required under Section 3.6.6.5 and those services that do not exceed the limits set forth in Section 4.2.3, Construction Phase Services provided more than 60 days after (1) the date of Substantial Completion of the Work or (2) the initial date of Substantial Completion identified in the agreement between the Owner and Contractor, whichever is earlier, shall be compensated as Additional Services to the extent the Architect incurs additional cost in providing those Construction Phase Services. § 4.2.5 If the services covered by this Agreement have not been completed within To be determined based of projected AE schedule within a period ( 17 ) months of the date of this Agreement, through no fault of the Architect, extension of the Architect’s services beyond that time shall be compensated as Additional Services. Page 183 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 17 ARTICLE 5 OWNER’S RESPONSIBILITIES § 5.1 Unless otherwise provided for under this Agreement, the Owner shall provide information in a timely manner regarding requirements for and limitations on the Project, including a written program which shall set forth the Owner’s objectives; schedule; constraints and criteria, including space requirements and relationships; flexibility; expandability; special equipment; systems; and site requirements. § 5.2 The Owner shall retain a Construction Manager to provide services, duties, and responsibilities as described in the agreement selected in Section 1.1.5. § 5.3 The Owner shall establish the Owner’s budget for the Project, including (1) the budget for the Cost of the Work as defined in Section 6.1; (2) the Owner’s other costs; and, (3) reasonable contingencies related to all of these costs. The Owner shall update the Owner’s budget for the Project as necessary throughout the duration of the Project until final completion. If the Owner significantly increases or decreases the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work, the Owner shall notify the Architect and Construction Manager. The Owner and the Architect, in consultation with the Construction Manager, shall thereafter agree to a corresponding change in the Project’s scope and quality. Compensation for services will be based on established contracted hourly rate and approval of proposed changes to contracted lump sum. § 5.3.1 The Owner acknowledges that accelerated, phased or fast-track scheduling provides a benefit, but also carries with it associated risks. Such risks include the Owner incurring costs for the Architect to coordinate and redesign portions of the Project affected by procuring or installing elements of the Project prior to the completion of all relevant Construction Documents, and costs for the Construction Manager to remove and replace previously installed Work. If the Owner selects accelerated, phased or fast-track scheduling, the Owner agrees to include in the budget for the Project sufficient contingencies to cover such costs. § 5.4 The Owner shall identify a representative authorized to act on the Owner’s behalf with respect to the Project. The Owner shall render decisions and approve the Architect’s submittals in a timely manner in order to avoid unreasonable delay in the orderly and sequential progress of the Architect’s services. § 5.5 The Owner shall furnish surveys to describe physical characteristics, legal limitations and utility locations for the site of the Project, and a written legal description of the site. The surveys and legal information shall include, as applicable, grades and lines of streets, alleys, pavements and adjoining property and structures; designated wetlands; adjacent drainage; rights-of-way, restrictions, easements, encroachments, zoning, deed restrictions, boundaries and contours of the site; locations, dimensions, and other necessary data with respect to existing buildings, other improvements and trees; and information concerning available utility services and lines, both public and private, above and below grade, including inverts and depths. All the information on the survey shall be referenced to a Project benchmark. § 5.6 The Owner shall furnish services of geotechnical engineers, which may include test borings, test pits, determinations of soil bearing values, percolation tests, evaluations of hazardous materials, seismic evaluation, ground corrosion tests and resistivity tests, including necessary operations for anticipating subsoil conditions, with written reports and appropriate recommendations. § 5.7 The Owner shall provide the Supplemental Services designated as the Owner’s responsibility in Section 4.1.1. § 5.8 If the Owner identified a Sustainable Objective in Article 1, the Owner shall fulfill its responsibilities as required in AIA Document E234™–2019, Sustainable Projects Exhibit, Construction Manager as Constructor Edition, attached to this Agreement. § 5.9 The Owner shall coordinate the services of its own consultants with those services provided by the Architect. Upon the Architect’s request, the Owner shall furnish copies of the scope of services in the contracts between the Owner and the Owner’s consultants. The Owner shall furnish the services of consultants other than those designated as the responsibility of the Architect in this Agreement, or authorize the Architect to furnish them as an Additional Service, when the Architect requests such services and demonstrates that they are reasonably required by the scope of the Project. The Owner shall require that its consultants and contractors maintain insurance, including professional liability insurance, as appropriate to the services or work provided. Page 184 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 18 § 5.10 The Owner shall furnish tests, inspections and reports required by law or the Contract Documents, such as structural, mechanical, and chemical tests, tests for air and water pollution, and tests for hazardous materials. § 5.11 The Owner shall furnish all legal, insurance and accounting services, including auditing services, that may be reasonably necessary at any time for the Project to meet the Owner’s needs and interests. § 5.12 The Owner shall provide prompt written notice to the Architect and Construction Manager if the Owner becomes aware of any fault or defect in the Project, including errors, omissions or inconsistencies in the Architect’s Instruments of Service. § 5.13 The Owner shall include the Architect in all communications with the Construction Manager that relate to or affect the Architect’s services or professional responsibilities. The Owner shall promptly notify the Architect of the substance of any direct communications between the Owner and the Construction Manager otherwise relating to the Project. Communications by and with the Architect’s consultants shall be through the Architect. § 5.14 The Owner shall coordinate the Architect’s duties and responsibilities set forth in the Agreement between the Owner and the Construction Manager with the Architect’s services set forth in this Agreement. The Owner shall provide the Architect a copy of the executed agreement between the Owner and Construction Manager, including the General Conditions of the Contract for Construction. § 5.15 The Owner shall provide the Architect access to the Project site prior to commencement of the Work and shall obligate the Construction Manager to provide the Architect access to the Work wherever it is in preparation or progress. § 5.16 Within 15 days after receipt of a written request from the Architect, the Owner shall furnish the requested information as necessary and relevant for the Architect to evaluate, give notice of, or enforce lien rights. ARTICLE 6 COST OF THE WORK § 6.1 For purposes of this Agreement, the Cost of the Work shall be the total cost to the Owner to construct all elements of the Project designed or specified by the Architect and shall include the Construction Manager’s general conditions costs, overhead, and profit. The Cost of the Work also includes the reasonable value of labor, materials, and equipment, donated to, or otherwise furnished by, the Owner. The Cost of the Work does not include the compensation of the Architect; the compensation of the Construction Manager for Preconstruction Phase services; the costs of the land, rights-of-way, financing, or contingencies for changes in the Work; or other costs that are the responsibility of the Owner. § 6.2 The Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work is provided in the Initial Information, and shall be adjusted throughout the Project as required under Sections 5.3 and 6.4. Evaluations of the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work represent the Architect’s judgment as a design professional. § 6.3 Intentional omitted. § 6.3.1 If the Architect is providing cost estimating services as a Supplemental Service, and a discrepancy exists between the Construction Manager’s cost estimates and the Architect’s cost estimates, the Architect and the Construction Manager shall work together to reconcile the cost estimates. § 6.4 If, prior to the conclusion of the Design Development Phase, the Construction Manager’s estimate of the Cost of the Work exceeds the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work, the Architect, in consultation with the Construction Manager, shall make appropriate recommendations to the Owner to adjust the Project’s size, quality or budget for the Cost of the Work, and the Owner shall cooperate with the Architect in making such adjustments. § 6.5 If the Construction Manager’s estimate of the Cost of the Work at the conclusion of the Design Development Phase exceeds the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work, the Owner shall .1 give written approval of an increase in the budget for the Cost of the Work; .2 terminate in accordance with Section 9.5; .3 in consultation with the Architect and Construction Manager, revise the Project program, scope, or quality as required to reduce the Cost of the Work; or .4 implement any other mutually acceptable alternative. Page 185 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 19 § 6.6 If the Owner chooses to proceed under Section 6.5.3, the Architect, without additional compensation, shall incorporate the revisions in the Construction Documents Phase as necessary to comply with the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work at the conclusion of the Design Development Phase Services, or the budget as adjusted under Section 6.5.1. The Architect’s revisions in the Construction Documents Phase shall be the limit of the Architect’s responsibility under this Article 6. § 6.7 After incorporation of modifications under Section 6.6, the Architect shall, as an Additional Service, make any required revisions to the Drawings, Specifications or other documents necessitated by the Construction Manager’s subsequent cost estimates, the Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal, or Control Estimate that exceed the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work, except when the excess is due to changes initiated by the Architect in scope, basic systems, or the kinds and quality of materials, finishes or equipment. ARTICLE 7 COPYRIGHTS AND LICENSES § 7.1 The Architect and the Owner warrant that in transmitting Instruments of Service, or any other information, the transmitting party is the copyright owner of such information or has permission from the copyright owner to transmit such information for its use on the Project. If the Owner and Architect intend to transmit Instruments of Service or any other information or documentation in digital form, they shall endeavor to establish necessary protocols governing such transmissions. § 7.2 The Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Architect and its consultants are instruments of the Architect’s service through which the Work to be executed by the Contractor is described, and are the property of the Owner ("Instruments of Service"). Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Architect shall be responsible for the content of the Instruments of Service in accordance with its standard of care. The Architect, Contractor or any Subcontractor, or lower tier sub-subcontractor or supplier shall not own or claim a copyright in the Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Architect. The Owner will retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, in addition to the copyright. The Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Architect, and copies thereof furnished to the Contractor or any Subcontractor, or lower tier sub-subcontractor or supplier are for use solely with respect to this Project. They are not to be used by the Architect, Contractor, Subcontractor, or lower tier sub-subcontractor or supplier on other projects or for additions to this Project outside the scope of the Work without the specific written consent of the Owner, unless the item in question is an industry standard drawing, specification or detail. The Architect, Contractor, Subcontractors, and lower tier sub-subcontractors and suppliers are granted a limited license to use and reproduce applicable portions of the Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Architect appropriate to and for use in the execution of their Work. Submittal or distribution to meet official regulatory requirements or for other purposes in connection with this Project is not to be construed as publication in derogation of the Owner’s copyright or other reserved rights. § 7.3 Upon execution of this Agreement, the Owner grants to the Architect a nonexclusive license to use the Instruments of Service solely and exclusively for purposes of constructing, using, maintaining, altering and adding to the Project. The Owner shall provide similar nonexclusive licenses to the Architect’s consultants consistent with this Agreement. The license granted under this section permits the Architect and its subconsultants to reproduce applicable portions of the Instruments of Service solely and exclusively for use in performing services or construction for the Project. If the Owner rightfully terminates this Agreement for cause or for convenience as set forth herein, the license granted to the Architect shall terminate and the Architect shall provide all copies of the Instruments of Service to the Owner. § 7.3.1 In the event the Owner uses the Instruments of Service on projects other than the Project without retaining the author of the Instruments of Service, the Owner releases the Architect and Architect’s consultant(s) from all claims and causes of action arising from such uses. The Owner, to the extent permitted by law, further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Architect and its consultants from all costs and expenses, including the cost of defense, related to claims and causes of action asserted by any third person or entity to the extent such costs and expenses arise from the Owner’s use of the Instruments of Service on projects other than the Project under this Section 7.3.1. The terms of this Section 7.3.1 shall not apply if the Owner rightfully terminates this Agreement for cause. § 7.4 Except for the licenses granted in this Article 7, no other license or right shall be deemed granted or implied under this Agreement. The Architect shall not assign, delegate, sublicense, pledge or otherwise transfer any license granted herein to another party without the prior written agreement of the Owner. Any unauthorized use of the Instruments of Service by the Architect shall be at the Architect’s sole risk and without liability to the Owner. Page 186 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 20 § 7.5 Except as otherwise stated in Section 7.3, the provisions of this Article 7 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. § 7.6 The Architect must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to (1) all data provided by the City pursuant to this Agreement, and (2) all data, created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Architect pursuant to this Agreement. The Architect is subject to all the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, including but not limited to the civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes Section 13.08, as if it were a government entity. In the event the Architect receives a request to release data, the Architect must immediately notify the Owner. The Owner will give the Architect instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released. Architect agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the Owner, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any claims resulting from Architects officers’, agents’, owners’, partners’, employees’, volunteers’, assignees’ or subcontractors’ unlawful disclosure and/or use of protected data. The terms of this paragraph shall survive the cancellation or termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE 8 CLAIMS AND DISPUTES § 8.1 General § 8.1.1 The Owner and Architect shall commence all claims and causes of action against the other and arising out of or related to this Agreement, whether in contract, tort, or otherwise, in accordance with the requirements of the binding dispute resolution method selected in this Agreement and within the period specified by applicable law, . The Owner and Architect waive all claims and causes of action not commenced in accordance with this Section 8.1.1. . Pending final resolution of a claim, dispute or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement or agreed in writing by the Architect and the Owner, the Architect shall proceed diligently with the performance of its services for the Project as required by this Agreement and the Owner shall continue to make payments to the Architect that are due, owing and unpaid under the terms of this Agreement (Paragraph deleted) § 8.1.3 The Architect shall indemnify and hold the Owner and the Owner’s officers, employees, and agents harmless from and against damages, losses and judgments arising from claims by third parties, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses recoverable under applicable law, but only to the extent they are caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the Architect, its employees and its consultants in the performance of professional services under this Agreement. § 8.1.4 The Architect and Owner waive consequential damages for claims, disputes, or other matters in question arising out of or relating to this Agreement. This mutual waiver is applicable, without limitation, to all consequential damages due to either party’s termination of this Agreement, except as specifically provided in Section 9.7. § 8.2 Mediation § 8.2.1 Any claim, dispute, or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to binding dispute resolution. If such matter relates to or is the subject of a lien arising out of the Architect’s services, the Architect may proceed in accordance with applicable law to comply with the lien notice or filing deadlines prior to resolution of the matter by mediation or by binding dispute resolution. § 8.2.2 The Owner and Architect shall endeavor to resolve claims, disputes and other matters in question between them by mediation. A request for mediation shall be made in writing, delivered to the other party to this Agreement, and filed with the person or entity administering the mediation. The request may be made concurrently with the filing of a complaint or other appropriate demand for binding dispute resolution but, in such event, mediation shall proceed in advance of binding dispute resolution proceedings, which shall be stayed pending mediation for a period of 60 days from the date of filing, unless stayed for a longer period by agreement of the parties or court order § 8.2.3 The parties shall share the mediator’s fee and any filing fees equally. The mediation shall be held in the place where the Project is located, unless another location is mutually agreed upon. Agreements reached in mediation shall be enforceable as settlement agreements in any court having jurisdiction thereof. § 8.2.4 If the parties do not resolve a dispute through mediation pursuant to this Section 8.2, the method of binding dispute resolution shall be the following: (Check the appropriate box.) Page 187 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 21 [ ]Arbitration pursuant to Section 8.3 of this Agreement [ X ]Litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction [ ]Other: (Specify) If the Owner and Architect do not select a method of binding dispute resolution, or do not subsequently agree in writing to a binding dispute resolution method other than litigation, the dispute will be resolved in a court of competent jurisdiction. (Paragraphs deleted) ARTICLE 9 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION § 9.1 If the Owner fails to make undisputed payments to the Architect for services properly performed and billed to the Owner and expenses properly incurred and billed to the Owner in accordance with this Agreement, such failure shall be considered cause for suspension of performance of services under this Agreement. Prior to such suspension, the Architect shall give seven days’ written notice to the Owner . In the event of a suspension of services, the Architect shall have no liability to the Owner for delay or damage caused the Owner because of such suspension of services. Before resuming services, the Owner shall pay the Architect all sums for such services and expenses properly incurred and billed. The Architect’s fees for the remaining services and the time schedules shall be equitably adjusted if the suspension exceeds forty-five (45) days. § 9.2 If the Owner suspends the Project, the Architect shall be compensated for services performed prior to notice of such suspension. The Architect’s fees for the remaining services and the time schedules shall be equitably adjusted. § 9.3 If the Owner suspends the Project for more than 90 cumulative days for reasons other than the fault of the Architect, the Architect may terminate this Agreement by giving not less than seven days’ written notice. § 9.4 Either party may terminate this Agreement upon not less than thirty (30) days’ written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the termination. § 9.5 The Owner may terminate this Agreement upon not less than seven days’ written notice to the Architect for the Owner’s convenience and without cause. § 9.6 If the Owner terminates this Agreement for its convenience pursuant to Section 9.5, or the Architect terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 9.3, the Owner shall compensate the Architect for services performed prior to termination. (Paragraphs deleted) ARTICLE 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS § 10.1 This Agreement shall be governed by the law of the State of Minnesota without regard to conflict of laws principals. § 10.2 Terms in this Agreement shall have the same meaning as those in AIA Document A201–2017, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, except as modified in this Agreement. The term "Contractor" as used in A201–2017 shall mean the Construction Manager. § 10.3 The Owner and Architect, respectively, bind themselves, their agents, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to this Agreement. Neither the Owner nor the Architect shall assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other, except that the Owner may assign this Agreement to a lender providing financing for the Project. The Architect shall take all actions necessary to facilitate such assignment. Page 188 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 22 § 10.4 If the Owner requests the Architect to execute certificates, the proposed language of such certificates shall be submitted to the Architect for review at least 14 days prior to the requested dates of execution. If the Owner requests the Architect to execute consents reasonably required to facilitate assignment to a lender, the Architect shall execute all such consents that are consistent with this Agreement, provided the proposed consent is submitted to the Architect for review at least 14 days prior to execution. The Architect shall not be required to execute certificates or consents that would require knowledge, services, or responsibilities beyond the scope of this Agreement. § 10.5 Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with, or a cause of action in favor of, a third party against either the Owner or Architect. § 10.6 Unless otherwise required in this Agreement, the Architect shall have no responsibility for the discovery, presence, handling, removal or disposal of, or exposure of persons to, hazardous materials or toxic substances in any form at the Project site. § 10.7 The Architect shall have the right to include photographic or artistic representations of the design of the Project among the Architect’s promotional and professional materials. The Architect shall be given reasonable access to the completed Project to make such representations. However, the Architect’s materials shall not include the Owner’s confidential or proprietary information or any other information prohibited by law from disclosure. This Section 10.7 shall survive the termination of this Agreement unless the Owner terminates this Agreement for cause pursuant to Section 9.4. § 10.8 If the Architect or Owner receives information specifically designated as "confidential" or "business proprietary," the receiving party shall keep such information strictly confidential and shall not disclose it to any other person except as set forth in Section 10.8.1. This Section 10.8 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. § 10.8.1 The receiving party may disclose "confidential" or "business proprietary" information when required by law, arbitrator’s order, or court order, including a subpoena or other form of compulsory legal process issued by a court or governmental entity, or to the extent such information is reasonably necessary for the receiving party to defend itself in any dispute. The receiving party may also disclose such information to its employees, consultants, or contractors in order to perform services or work solely and exclusively for the Project, provided those employees, consultants and contractors are subject to the restrictions on the disclosure and use of such information as set forth in this Section 10.8. § 10.9 The invalidity of any provision of the Agreement shall not invalidate the Agreement or its remaining provisions. If it is determined that any provision of the Agreement violates any law, or is otherwise invalid or unenforceable, then that provision shall be revised to the extent necessary to make that provision legal and enforceable. In such case the Agreement shall be construed, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to give effect to the parties’ intentions and purposes in executing the Agreement. § 10.10 To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Architect hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the Owner, it officers, employees, and agents (collectively the "Indemnities") harmless from all losses, claims, liabilities, injuries, damages, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, that the Indemnities may incur to the extent arising out of the negligent performance or lack of performance by the Architect of its duties and obligations under or pursuant to this Agreement. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Owner hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the Architect, it officers, employees, and agents (collectively the "Architect Indemnities") harmless from all losses, claims, liabilities, injuries, damages, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, that the Architect Indemnities may incur to the extent arising out of the negligent performance or lack of performance by the Architect of its duties and obligations under or pursuant to this Agreement. § 10.11 Time is of the essence of this Agreement. § 10.12 Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, the Owner’s review and approval of any and all documents or other matters required herein shall be for the purpose of providing the Architect with information as to the Owner’s objectives and goals with respect to the Project and not for the purpose of determining the accuracy, Page 189 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 23 ARTICLE 11 COMPENSATION § 11.1 For the Architect’s Basic Services described under Article 3, the Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows: .1 Stipulated Sum (Insert amount) (Paragraphs deleted) Two hundred eighty one thousand, seven hundred forty dollars $281,740 § 11.2 For the Architect’s Supplemental Services designated in Section 4.1.1 and for any Sustainability Services required pursuant to Section 4.1.3, the Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows: (Insert amount of, or basis for, compensation. If necessary, list specific services to which particular methods of compensation apply.) Included in base services. Certification costs to be paid by Owner § 11.3 For Additional Services that may arise during the course of the Project, including those under Section 4.2, the Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows: (Insert amount of, or basis for, compensation.) Exhibit 1 § 11.4 Compensation for Supplemental and Additional Services of the Architect’s consultants when not included in Sections 11.2 or 11.3, shall be the amount invoiced to the Architect plus percent ( %), or as follows: (Insert amount of, or basis for computing, Architect’s consultants’ compensation for Supplemental or Additional Services.) Architects Consultants are billed at no additional fees added § 11.5 When compensation for Basic Services is based on a stipulated sum or a percentage basis, the proportion of compensation for each phase of services shall be as follows: Schematic Design Phase twenty percent (20 %) Design Development Phase twenty one percent ( 21 %) Construction Documents Phase thirty two percent (32 %) Construction Phase twenty seven percent (27 %) Total Basic Compensation one hundred percent (100 %) The Owner acknowledges that with an accelerated Project delivery, multiple bid package process, or Construction Manager as constructor project delivery method, the Architect may be providing its services in multiple Phases simultaneously. Therefore, the Architect shall be permitted to invoice monthly in proportion to services performed in each Phase of Services, as appropriate. § 11.6 When compensation identified in Section 11.1 is on a percentage basis, progress payments for each phase of Basic Services shall be calculated by multiplying the percentages identified in this Article by the Owner’s most recent budget for the Cost of the Work. Compensation paid in previous progress payments shall not be adjusted based on subsequent updates to the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work. § 11.6.1 When compensation is on a percentage basis and any portions of the Project are deleted or otherwise not constructed, compensation for those portions of the Project shall be payable to the extent services are performed on those portions. The Architect shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with this Agreement for all services properly performed whether or not the Construction Phase is commenced. Page 190 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 24 § 11.7 The hourly billing rates for services of the Architect and the Architect’s consultants are set forth below. The rates shall be adjusted in accordance with the Architect’s and Architect’s consultants’ normal review practices. provided such rates and practices are approved by Owner (If applicable, attach an exhibit of hourly billing rates or insert them below.) Exhibit 1 Employee or Category Rate ($0.00) § 11.8 Compensation for Reimbursable Expenses § 11.8.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to compensation for Basic, Supplemental, and Additional Services and include expenses incurred by the Architect and the Architect’s consultants directly related to the Project, as follows: .1 Transportation and authorized out-of-town travel and subsistence; .2 Long distance services, dedicated data and communication services, teleconferences, Project web sites, and extranets; .3 Permitting and other fees required by authorities having jurisdiction over the Project; .4 Printing, reproductions, plots, and standard form documents; .5 Postage, handling, and delivery; .6 Expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates, if authorized in advance by the Owner; .7 Renderings, physical models, mock-ups, professional photography, and presentation materials requested by the Owner or required for the Project; .8 If required by the Owner, and with the Owner’s prior written approval, the Architect’s consultants’ expenses of professional liability insurance dedicated exclusively to this Project, or the expense of additional insurance coverage or limits in excess of that normally maintained by the Architect’s consultants; .9 All taxes levied on professional services and on reimbursable expenses; .10 Site office expenses; .11 Registration fees and any other fees charged by the Certifying Authority or by other entities as necessary to achieve the Sustainable Objective; and .12 Other similar Project-related expenditures. § 11.8.2 For Reimbursable Expenses the compensation shall be the expenses incurred by the Architect and the Architect’s consultants Reimbursable expenses are in addition to above fee and will be invoiced at 1 times actual cost. (Paragraphs deleted) § 11.10 Payments to the Architect § 11.10.1 Initial Payments § 11.10.1.1 No initial payment shall be made upon execution of this Agreement. § 11.10.1.2 If a Sustainability Certification is part of the Sustainable Objective, an initial payment to the Architect of ($ ) shall be made upon execution of this Agreement for registration fees and other fees payable to the Certifying Authority and necessary to achieve the Sustainability Certification. The Architect’s payments to the Certifying Authority shall be credited to the Owner’s account at the time the expense is incurred. § 11.10.2 Progress Payments § 11.10.2.1 Unless otherwise agreed, payments for services shall be made monthly in proportion to services performed. Payments are due and payable upon presentation of the Architect’s invoice. Amounts unpaid thirty five ( 35 ) days after the invoice date shall bear interest at the rate entered below, or in the absence thereof at the legal rate prevailing from time to time at the principal place of business of the Architect. (Insert rate of monthly or annual interest agreed upon.) 0.05 % one-half percent Page 191 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 25 The Architect’s invoice shall be submitted in a format acceptable to the Owner, and shall show sufficient information to allow the Owner to determine the propriety thereof. At a minimum, each invoice shall state services completed during the billing period, amount due for Services performed during the billing period, amount previously paid, and agreed contract balance remaining. The Architect shall be paid in the time period set forth in the Prompt Payment of Local Government Bills law, Minnesota Statutes § 471.425. (Paragraph deleted) § 11.10.2.3 Records of Reimbursable Expenses, expenses pertaining to Supplemental and Additional Services, and services performed on the basis of hourly rates shall be available to the Owner at mutually convenient times, and shall be maintained by Architect for three (3) years after Final Completion. ARTICLE 12 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Special terms and conditions that modify this Agreement are as follows: (Include other terms and conditions applicable to this Agreement.) This Agreement supersedes any prior or contemporaneous representations or agreements, whether written or oral, between the Parties and contains the entire agreement. Any modification or amendment of to this Agreement shall require a written agreement signed by both Parties. In the hiring of employees to perform work under this Agreement, the Contractor shall not discriminate against any person by reason of any characteristic or classification protected by state or federal law. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. All proceedings related to this Agreement shall be venued in Hennepin County, Minnesota 12.1 179D(d)(4) Energy Tax Allocation for Designers of Buildings for Tax-Exempt Owners. Government and Nonprofit entities qualify as Tax-Exempt Building Owners. The Owner agrees to allocate to the Architect and the Architect’s participating and responsible Consultants all Section 179D tax deductions dedicated the Designers of energy efficient commercial property, provided these commercial property improvements qualify for allocations per the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Section 179D, Notice 2008-40, and updates included in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Upon achieving Substantial Completion for the Project, the Architect will prepare and submit the Form of Allocation letter to the Owner for approval on behalf of the design team and participating Consultants. The Architect and Architect’s participating Consultants will maintain records as are sufficient to establish the entitlement to, and amount of, any deduction claimed by the Consultant relevant to 179D per IRS regulations. Reference: As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress enacted Section 179D of the Internal Revenue Code to encourage the energy efficient design and construction of new or renovated properties. Notice 2008-40 of Internal Revenue Bulletin 2008-14 and applicable updates included in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 provides that in the case of a government owned property (Federal, State or Local government or political subdivision), and qualifying not-for-profit entities, the deduction for energy efficient buildings may be allocated to the designer for the taxable year that includes the date on which the property was placed in service. These tax allocations are not possible to claim as a government entity, or a not-for-profit entity, and are therefore assigned to the responsible designer(s) of qualifying energy efficient property incorporated into the Project. A designer may include, for example, an architect, engineer, environmental consultant, or energy services provider, who creates the technical specification [plans and specifications] for a new building, existing building renovation, or an addition to an existing building that incorporates an energy efficient property allowed under Section 179D. 12.2 Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.425, subd. 4a, the Architect must pay any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the Architect’s receipt of payment from the Owner for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Architect must pay interest of one and one-half percent (1½ %) per month or any part of a month to subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is $10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Architect shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Architect shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney’s fees, incurred in bringing the action. ARTICLE 13 SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT § 13.1 This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the Owner and the Architect and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both the Owner and Architect. Page 192 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 26 § 13.2 This Agreement is comprised of the following documents identified below: .1 AIA Document B133™–2019, Standard Form Agreement Between Owner and Architect, Construction Manager as Constructor Edition .2 AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, dated as indicated below, if completed, or the following: (Insert the date of the E203-2013 incorporated into this agreement.) .3 Exhibits: (Check the appropriate box for any exhibits incorporated into this Agreement.) [ ]AIA Document E234™–2019, Sustainable Projects Exhibit, Construction Manager as Constructor Edition dated as indicated below. (Insert the date of the E234-2019 incorporated into this agreement.) [ X ] Other Exhibits incorporated into this Agreement: (Clearly identify any other exhibits incorporated into this Agreement, including any exhibits and scopes of services identified as exhibits in Section 4.1.2.) Exhibit 1 Rate Schedule OPN Architects Emanuelson-podos Meyer Borgman Johnson Exhibit 2 Fees .4 Other documents: (List other documents, if any, forming part of the Agreement.) Exhibit 3: Proposal of Professional Architectural and Engineering Services This Agreement entered into as of the day and year first written above. OWNER (Signature)ARCHITECT (Signature) Joseph Wallace, AIA Associate Principal MN License #: 61723 (Printed name and title) (Printed name, title, and license number, if required) Page 193 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA® Document B133® – 2019 This Additions and Deletions Report, as defined on page 1 of the associated document, reproduces below all text the author has added to the standard form AIA document in order to complete it, as well as any text the author may have added to or deleted from the original AIA text. Added text is shown underlined. Deleted text is indicated with a horizontal line through the original AIA text. Note: This Additions and Deletions Report is provided for information purposes only and is not incorporated into or constitute any part of the associated AIA document. This Additions and Deletions Report and its associated document were generated simultaneously by AIA software at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024. Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 1 PAGE 1 AGREEMENT made as of the 17th day of December in the year 2024 … City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina MN, 55424 … OPN Architects 212 N. 3rd Avenue Suite 312 Minneapolis, MN 55401 REMIT ALL PAYMENTS TO: OPN Architects, Inc. 200 5th Avenue SE, Suite 201 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401 ATTN: Vickie Choate (vchoate@opnarchitects.com) Becky Ulferts (bulferts@opnarchitects.com) (Name, location, and detailed description) Fred Richards Park Facility 7640 Parklawn Ave, Edina MN Renovation and New Building OPN Project Number: 24723000 … Unknown at time of execution PAGE 2 Architect will develop the program with the Owner, and Owner identified stakeholders, during the Programming and Preliminary Design Phase of work. … Renovation Page 194 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 2 The new Fred Richards Park includes a large nature area, destination playground, biking and walking trails, Pickleball courts, open space, and numerous other active and passive recreational activities. To accommodate users, the renovation of existing space must include but is not limited to a trailhead for 9 Mile Creek Trail, park programming or public meeting space, ecology and nature learning kiosk, renovated restrooms, and additional storage spaces. This facility will incorporate and aesthetically tie in existing structures and accommodate new service requests including a new roof, reskinning, and upgrades to doors and entrances. Additional parking and civil infrastructure will be provided by Confluence and design team and be coordinated with selected firm. Clubhouse renovation will work with 2,678 SF exiting building and enclose an additional 1,700 SF storage and maintenance space. New Building New facility must fit within master plan location. A preliminary square footage of 2,500/3000 SF for food and beverage and community space as well as additional square footage for outdoor restrooms. PAGE 3 Total project budget is $3 million dollars inclusive of all phases of the project from planning to closeout and commissioning. This budget includes construction costs, soft costs, FF&E, and program based needs. Anticipated Construction Cost of Work is $2,600,000 … Based off AE schedule … Based off CM schedule … Based off CM schedule … Based off schedule … [ X ]AIA Document A133–2019, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Constructor where the basis of payment is the Cost of the Work Plus a Fee with a Guaranteed Maximum Price. … Unknown at time of execution, to be determined later by mutual agreement with Owner … Adhere to City of Edina Sustainable Design Policy PAGE 4 Rachel Finberg, City of Edina Park Planning Project Manager, and/or her successor, 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 952.826.0397 rfinberg@edinamn.gov … .2 Land Surveyor:Landscape Architect: Page 195 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 3 Confluence Terry Minarik, Principal 901 N 3rd St #225 Minneapolis, MN 55401 … Braun Intertec Corporation Jeff Casmer, Project Engineer 11001 Hampshire Ave S Minneapolis MN, 55438 … Emmons & Oliver Resources (EOR) Jason Naber, Senior Partner Ste 300 1919 University Ave. W St Paul, MN 55104 … (List any other consultants and contractors retained by the Owner.) Security Vendor as Specified by City of Edina Fire Alarm and Sprinkler Vendor as Specified by City of Edina 3rd Party Commissioning Agent 3rd Party Testing and Inspections … Joseph Wallace 212 North 3rd Avenue Suite 312 Minneapolis, MN 55401 jwallace@opnarchitects.com office: 612-355-7111 cell: 612-523-2210 § 1.1.12 The Architect shall retain the consultants identified in Sections 1.1.12.1 and 1.1.12.2:1.1.12.2 Any other consultants not specifically mentioned in Sections 1.1.12.1 and 1.1.12.2, but retained by the Architect for the completion of the Architect’s services under Article 3 and Section 4.1 of this Agreement shall be retained at the Architect’s sole expense. Should additional consultants be required for completion of the project due to unforeseen conditions or conditions outside of the Architect’s control, additional expense may be negotiated between the Owner and the Architect. All Consultants retained by the Architect shall be qualified professionals and licensed in good standing as required by Applicable Law (defined below in Section 3.1.6). The Architect shall be responsible to the Owner for all work performed by Architect’s consultants: PAGE 5 Meyer Borgman Johnson 510 S Marquette Ave Unit 900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 … Emanuelson-Podas, Inc 7705 Bush Lake Rd Edina, MN 55439 … Page 196 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 4 Emanuelson-Podas, Inc 7705 Bush Lake Rd Edina, MN 55439 … § 1.2 The Owner and Architect may rely on the Initial Information. Both parties, however, recognize that the Initial Information may materially change and, in that event, the Owner and the Architect shall appropriately adjust the Architect’s services, schedule for the Architect’s services, and the Architect’s compensation. The Owner shall adjust the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work and the Owner’s anticipated design and construction milestones, as necessary, to accommodate material changes in the Initial Information.If the Architect identifies a material change such that Architect’s services, schedule for Architect’s services, and the Architect’s compensation may be affected, then the Architect shall submit information regarding that purported material change and any information substantiating the material change to the Owner within thirty (30) days of the event giving rise to the material change for review. The Owner’s budget for Cost of Work, the Owner’s anticipated design, and construction milestones shall not change without written approval from the Owner. If the Architect fails to submit the material change to the Owner within thirty (30) days of the event giving rise to the material change, then the Owner shall have no obligation to change Owner’s budget for Cost of Work, the Owner’s anticipated design, and construction milestones. Owner and Architect shall notify each other of any potential changes in scope which would alter lump sum of contract price. § 1.3 The parties shall agree upon written protocols governing the transmission and use of, and reliance on, of Instruments of Service or any other information or documentation in digital form. The parties will use AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, to establish the protocols for the development, use, transmission, and exchange of digital data. § 1.3.1 Any use of, or reliance on, all or a portion of a building information model without agreement to written protocols governing the use of, and reliance on, the information contained in the model and without having those protocols set forth in AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, and the requisite AIA Document G202™–2013, Project Building Information Modeling Protocol Form, shall be at the using or relying party’s sole risk and without liability to the other party and its contractors or consultants, the authors of, or contributors to, the building information model, and each of their agents and employees. PAGE 6 § 2.3 The Architect shall provide its services in conjunction with the services of a Construction Manager as described in the agreement identified in Section 1.1.5. The Architect shall not be responsible for actions taken by the Construction Manager. The Owner has the authority to approve or disapprove members of the Architect’s team (including all consultants and employees) on the Project, and the Architect will not change any of the members of its team or their roles without the prior written consent of the Owner § 2.4 The Architect shall identify a representative authorized to act on behalf of the Architect with respect to the Project. The Owner has the authority to approve or disapprove members of the Architect’s team (including all consultants and employees) on the Project, and the Architect will not change any of the members of its team or their roles without the prior written consent of the Owner. … § 2.6 Insurance. The Architect shall maintain the following insurance until termination of this Agreement. If any of the requirements set forth below are in addition to the types and limits the Architect normally maintains, the Owner shall pay the Architect as set forth in Section 11.9. § 2.6.1 Commercial General Liability with policy limits of not less than ($ ) for each occurrence and ($ ) in the aggregate for bodily injury and property damage.one million dollars ($ 1,000,000 ) for each occurrence and two million dollars ($ 2,000,000 ) in the aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, products completed operations, personal injury, advertising injury, and contractually assumed liability. The City shall be endorsed as additional insured. Page 197 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 5 § 2.6.2 Automobile Liability covering vehicles owned, and non-owned vehicles used, by the Architect with policy limits of not less than ($ ) per accident one million dollars ($ 1,000,000 ) combined single limit for bodily injury, death of any person, and property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance and use of those motor vehicles, along with any other statutorily required automobile coverage. PAGE 7 § 2.6.5 Employers’ Liability with policy limits not less than ($ ) each accident, ($ ) each employee, and ($ ) policy limit.Workers’ Compensation at statutory the Architect agrees to provide workers’ compensation insurance for all its employees in accordance with the statutory requirements of the State of Minnesota. The Architect shall also carry employers liability coverage with minimum limits are as follows: $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Disease per employee $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Disease aggregate $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Accident § 2.6.6 Professional Liability covering negligent acts, errors and omissions in the performance of professional services, with policy limits of not less than one million dollars ($ 1,000,000 ) per claim and ($ ) in the two million dollars ($ 2,000,000 ) annual aggregate. § 2.6.7 Additional Insured Obligations. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Architect shall cause the primary and excess or umbrella policies polices for Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability to include the Owner as an additional insured for claims caused in whole or in part by the Architect’s negligent acts or omissions. The additional insured coverage shall be primary and non-contributory to any of the Owner’s insurance policies and shall apply to both ongoing and completed operations. § 2.6.8 The Architect shall provide certificates of insurance to the Owner that evidence compliance with the requirements in this Section 2.6. . Certificates of insurance acceptable to the Owner shall be filed with the Owner prior to commencement of the Work. These certificates and the insurance policies shall contain a provision that coverage afforded under the policies will not be cancelled or allowed to expire until at least 30 days’ prior written notice has been given to the Owner. PAGE 8 § 3.1.6 The Architect shall, in coordination with the Construction Manager, contact governmental authorities required to approve the Construction Documents and entities providing utility services to the Project. The Architect shall respond to applicable design requirements imposed by those authorities and entities. . The Architect’s services shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, codes, regulations, permits, governmental approvals, and other orders of any public authority having jurisdiction over the Project ("Applicable Law"). The Architect acknowledges that the Owner, the Owner’s consultants, and any contractors engaged by the Owner will rely upon the accuracy and integrity of the Construction Documents in the construction of the Project. § 3.1.7 The Architect shall assist the Owner and Construction Manager in connection with the Owner’s responsibility for filing documents required for the approval of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. The Architect will make any required revisions to its Documents as necessary to comply with governmental or utility company requirements at no additional fee or expense to the Owner. § 3.1.8 Prior to the Owner’s acceptance of the Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal, or the Owner’s approval of the Construction Manager’s Control Estimate, as applicable, the Architect shall consider the Construction Manager’s requests for substitutions and, upon written request of the Construction Manager, provide clarification or interpretations pertaining to the Drawings, Specifications, and other documents submitted by the Architect. The Architect and Construction Manager shall include the Owner in communications related to substitution requests, clarifications, and interpretations. The Architect will collaborate and work closely with Owner and Owner’s construction manager (referenced herein as "Construction Manager" or "Contractor") throughout the design process for purposes of estimating the Cost of the Work to comply with the Project Budget. The Architect shall submit Design Documents to Owner and Construction Manager for estimating purposes at the following milestones: (a) at 100% Schematic Design; (b) at 90% Design Development. If the estimated Cost of the Work exceeds the Project Budget, as determined by Owner and Construction Manager at each of the aforementioned milestones, the Architect, at no additional cost to Owner, shall collaborate and work with Owner and Construction Manager to determine and incorporate cost reductions and/or value engineering to reduce the estimated Cost of the Work to be within the Project Page 198 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 6 Budget. The Architect will receive compensation for re-design, only when agreed upon based on scope or budget changes and with an approved proposal. § 3.1.9 As part of the Basic Services, the Architect will include up to (3) additive and deductive alternates in the GMP package (defined below) that, in total, may increase or decrease the Cost of the Work by approximately 5% of the then-current Project Budget. The Architect’s compensation will not change due to of incorporation of such alternates into the Project. The Architect will be responsible for providing complete Construction Documents for these alternates, including detailed Drawings and Specifications. § 3.1.10 The Architect shall be compensated for any Owner initiated scope or budget changes that would increase architects responsibilities. Compensation will be based on hourly contracted amount and be approved based on provided architects proposal. The Owner shall comply with section 5.3 with regards to collaboration and information. … § 3.2.1 At a time to be mutually agreed upon by the Owner and the Construction Manager, Guaranteed Maximum Price set forth for the Construction Manager will be the cumulative or sum total of all of the competitively bid contracts. At time of public bid package opening, the Construction Manager shall prepare, for review by the Owner and Architect, and for the Owner’s acceptance or approval, a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal or Control Estimate. The Architect shall assist the Owner in reviewing the Construction Manager’s proposal or estimate. The Architect’s review is not for the purpose of discovering errors, omissions, or inconsistencies; for the assumption of any responsibility for the Construction Manager’s proposed means, methods, sequences, techniques, or procedures; or for the verification of any estimates of cost or estimated cost proposals. In the event that the Architect discovers any inconsistencies or inaccuracies in the information presented, the Architect shall promptly notify the Owner and Construction Manager. PAGE 9 § 3.3.7 Upon receipt of the Construction Manager’s review comments and cost estimate at the conclusion of the Schematic Design Phase, the Architect shall take action as required under Section 6.4, and request the Owner’s written approval of the Schematic Design Documents. If revisions to the Schematic Design Documents are required to comply with the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work at the conclusion of the Schematic Design Phase, the Architect shall incorporate the required revisions in the Design Development Phase.Phase at no cost to the Owner. … § 3.4.1 Based on the Owner’s written approval of the Schematic Design Documents, and on the Owner’s authorization of any adjustments in the Project requirements and the budget for the Cost of the Work, the Architect shall prepare Design Development Documents for the Construction Manager’s review and the Owner’s approval. The Design Development Documents shall be based upon information provided, and estimates prepared by, the Construction Manager and shall illustrate and describe the development of the approved Schematic Design Documents and shall consist of drawings and other documents including plans, sections, elevations, typical construction details, and diagrammatic layouts of building systems to fix and describe the size and character of the Project as to architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical systems, and other appropriate elements. The Design Development Documents shall also include outline specifications that identify major materials and systems and establish in general their quality levels. PAGE 10 § 3.4.3 Upon receipt of the Construction Manager’s information and estimate at the conclusion of the Design Development Phase, the Architect shall take action as required under Sections 6.5 and 6.6 and request the Owner’s written approval of the Design Development Documents. … § 3.5.1 Based on the Owner’s written approval of the Design Development Documents, and on the Owner’s authorization of any adjustments in the Project requirements and the budget for the Cost of the Work, the Architect shall prepare Construction Documents for the Construction Manager’s review and the Owner’s approval. The Construction Documents shall illustrate and describe the further development of the approved Design Development Page 199 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 7 Documents and shall consist of Drawings and Specifications setting forth in detail the quality levels and performance criteria of materials and systems and other requirements for the construction of the Work. The Owner and Architect acknowledge that, in order to perform the Work, the Construction Manager will provide additional information, including Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples and other similar submittals, which the Architect shall review in accordance with Section 3.6.4. … § 3.5.5 Upon receipt of the Construction Manager’s information and estimate at the conclusion of the Construction Documents Phase, the Architect shall take action as required under Section 6.7, and request the Owner’s approval of the Construction Documents. The Owner’s review of such Construction Documents is not conducted for the purpose of determining compliance with any laws, ordinances, codes, rules, regulations and requirements of governmental agencies applicable to the Project, and the Owner’s approval of such Construction Documents shall not be deemed to be a certification that the Construction Documents are in accordance with such requirements, as determining such compliance is solely the responsibility of the Architect. The Construction Manager shall update the estimate for the Cost of the Work. If the Owner believes that the estimated Cost of the Work based on the Construction Documents along with additional value engineering and scope definition documents as required and formally agreed on in writing by the Owner will be higher than the contract sum obtained from the Contractor based on the Contract Sum Pricing Documents, along with additional value engineering and scope definition documents as required and formally agreed on in writing by the Owner, the Architect shall, for no additional compensation from the Owner, propose reasonable revisions to the Construction Documents without significantly reducing the character, size, quality, components or general scope of the Project such that the Cost of the Work shall not exceed the contract sum obtained from the Contractor based on the Contract Sum Pricing Documents along with additional value engineering and scope definition documents as required and formally agreed on in writing by the Owner. § 3.5.6 As directed by Owner, the Architect shall assist the Owner, Owner’s Representative and contractor in bidding the Project by: .1 providing [3 to 5] bid packages if Construction Schedule warrants; .2 facilitating the distribution of Bidding Documents to prospective bidders; § 3.5.7 The Architect shall prepare the Construction Documents in accordance with the Requirements. The Architect shall ensure that the Construction Documents comply with Applicable Law. The Architect shall also identify for Owner all applicable governmental approvals, consents, and permits (collectively, the "Permits") that are (a) necessitated by the Construction Documents and (b) required in order for the Owner to fully utilize the Project in accordance with Applicable Law. Architect shall assist the Owner in obtaining all required Permits. § 3.5.8 If requested by the Owner, the Architect’s Construction Documents Phase Services also shall include making a reasonable number of presentations to explain the design of the Project to the Owner, governmental authorities or members of the community that may be impacted by the Project PAGE 11 § 3.6.1.3 The Architect shall advise and consult with the Owner and Construction Manager during the Construction Phase Services. The Architect shall have authority to act on behalf of the Owner only to the extent provided in this Agreement. The Architect shall not have control over, charge of, or responsibility for the construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work, nor shall the Architect be responsible for the Construction Manager’s failure to perform the Work in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Architect shall be responsible for the Architect’s negligent acts or omissions, omissions and the negligent acts or omissions of consultants and others employed by the Architect, but shall not have control over or charge of, and shall not be responsible for, acts or omissions of the Construction Manager or of any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. Nothing herein shall relieve the Architect of liability for failing to perform in accordance with the requirements of and standard of care established herein. PAGE 12 § 3.6.2.3 The Architect shall interpret and decide matters concerning performance under, and requirements of, the Contract Documents on written request of either the Owner or Construction Manager. the Owner. The Architect’s Page 200 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 8 response to such requests shall be made in writing within any time limits agreed upon or otherwise with reasonable promptness. § 3.6.2.4 Interpretations and decisions of the Architect shall be consistent with the intent of, and reasonably inferable from, the Contract Documents and shall be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and decisions, the Architect shall endeavor to secure faithful performance by both Owner and Construction Manager, shall not show partiality to either, Construction Manager and shall not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions rendered in good faith. The Architect’s Owner’s decisions on matters relating to aesthetic effect shall be final if consistent with the intent expressed in the Contract Documents.Documents.. PAGE 13 § 3.6.5.1 The Architect may order minor changes in the Work that are consistent with the intent of the Contract Documents and do not involve an adjustment in the Contract Sum or an extension of the Contract Time. Subject to Section 4.2, the Architect shall prepare Change Orders and Construction Change Directives for the Owner’s approval and execution in accordance with the Contract Documents.Documents, including the evaluation of change order requests and proposals. … § 3.6.6.5 Upon request of the Owner, and prior to the expiration of one year from the date of Substantial Completion, the Architect shall, without additional compensation, conduct a meeting with the Owner to review the facility operations and performance.performance, and shall provide a list of defects in the Project to the Owner at least two weeks prior to the one-year anniversary of the date of Substantial Completion. . PAGE 14 § 4.1.1.1 Assistance with Selection of Construction Manager Owner § 4.1.1.2 Programming Architect § 4.1.1.3 Multiple Preliminary Designs Architect … Page 201 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 9 § 4.1.1.5 Existing facilities surveys Owner § 4.1.1.6 Site evaluation and planning Confluence § 4.1.1.7 Building Information Model management responsibilities Architect § 4.1.1.8 Development of Building Information Models for post construction use Architect § 4.1.1.9 Civil engineering Confluence § 4.1.1.10 Landscape design Confluence § 4.1.1.11 Architectural interior design Architect § 4.1.1.12 Value analysis Architect § 4.1.1.13 Cost estimating Architect coordinate with CMAR § 4.1.1.14 On-site project representation CMAR § 4.1.1.15 Conformed documents for construction Architect § 4.1.1.16 As-designed record drawings Architect § 4.1.1.17 As-constructed record drawings Architect with as-built documentation from CMAR § 4.1.1.18 Post-occupancy evaluation Owner § 4.1.1.19 Facility support services Owner § 4.1.1.20 Tenant-related services Owner § 4.1.1.21 Architect’s coordination of the Owner’s consultants As needed § 4.1.1.22 Telecommunications/data design Architect Coordinated § 4.1.1.23 Security evaluation and planning Architect Coordinated § 4.1.1.24 Commissioning Owner, As needed § 4.1.1.25 Sustainable Project Services pursuant to Section 4.1.3 City Sustainable Design Policy - Architect § 4.1.1.26 Historic preservation N/A § 4.1.1.27 Furniture, furnishings, and equipment design Architect § 4.1.1.28 Other services provided by specialty Consultants Negotiated As needed § 4.1.1.29 Other Supplemental Services Negotiated As needed PAGE 15 .1 AE to provide structural, mechanical, electrical. .2 AE to provide specifications, layouts, procurement, installation, punch list and overall management of all FFE vendors including bidding out to multiple vendors as required for building scope indicated in 1.1.2 . .3 AE to coordinate with City’s preferred vendors for IT, AV, and FFE. .4 Commissioning if needed will be 3rd party. … The Architect may Owner may request the Architect to provide Additional Services after execution of this Agreement without invalidating the Agreement. Agreement (in which case the Architect shall not be entitled to additional compensation or an adjustment in the Architect’s schedule for such services). Except for services required due to the fault of the Architect, any Additional Services provided in accordance with this Section 4.2 shall entitle the Architect to compensation pursuant to Section 11.3 and an appropriate adjustment in the Architect’s schedule. No claims for Additional Services shall be made unless the Owner is notified prior to the Architect rendering such services and such services are approved by the Owner in writing. Approved Additional Services shall be billed in accordance with Section 11.10.2. Failure to strictly comply with these requirements shall constitute a waiver of any claim for such Additional Services. Page 202 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 10 § 4.2.1 Upon recognizing the need to perform the following Additional Services, the Architect shall notify the Owner with reasonable promptness in writing with reasonable promptness, but in any event no later than thirty (30) days from the event necessitating Additional Services, and explain the facts and circumstances giving rise to the need. The Architect shall not proceed to provide the following Additional Services until the Architect receives the Owner’s written authorization: PAGE 16 .8 Preparation for, and attendance at, a public presentation, meeting or hearing;at an unreasonable number of, public presentations, meetings or hearings; … § 4.2.2 To avoid delay in the Construction Phase, the Architect shall provide the following Additional Services, upon recognizing the need to perform the following Additional Services, the Architect shall , notify the Owner with reasonable promptness, , but in any event no later than thirty (30) days from the event necessitating Additional Services, and explain the facts and circumstances giving rise to the need. If, upon receipt of the Architect’s notice, the Owner determines that all or parts of the services are not required, the Owner shall give prompt written notice to the Architect of the Owner’s determination. The Owner shall compensate the Architect for the services provided prior to the Architect’s receipt of the Owner’s notice:Architect shall not proceed with providing the Additional Services until Architect’s receipt of the Owner’s written authorization : .1 Reviewing a Construction Manager’s submittal out of sequence from the submittal schedule approved by the Architect;Intentionally deleted. … .3 Preparing Change Orders, and Construction Change Directives that require evaluation of the Construction Manager’s proposals and supporting data, or the preparation or revision of Instruments of Service;Intentionally deleted. … .5 Evaluating substitutions proposed by the Owner or Construction Manager and making subsequent revisions to Instruments of Service resulting therefrom.Intentionally deleted … .1 Two ( 2 ) reviews of each Shop Drawing, Product Data item, sample and similar submittals of the Construction Manager .2 ( ) visits One ( 1 ) visit per month to the site by the Architect during constructionconstruction, except that Architect will provide additional site visits as needed to resolve all issues related to errors and omissions in the Construction Documents without any additional compensation from Owner .3 Two ( 2 ) inspections for any portion of the Work to determine whether such portion of the Work is substantially complete in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents .4 One ( 1 ) inspections for any portion of the Work to determine final completion .5 Attendance or representation at all weekly Owner-Architect-Contractor meetings … § 4.2.5 If the services covered by this Agreement have not been completed within To be determined based of projected AE schedule within a period ( 17 ) months of the date of this Agreement, through no fault of the Architect, extension of the Architect’s services beyond that time shall be compensated as Additional Services. PAGE 17 § 5.3 The Owner shall establish the Owner’s budget for the Project, including (1) the budget for the Cost of the Work as defined in Section 6.1; (2) the Owner’s other costs; and, (3) reasonable contingencies related to all of these costs. The Owner shall update the Owner’s budget for the Project as necessary throughout the duration of the Project until final completion. If the Owner significantly increases or decreases the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work, the Page 203 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 11 Owner shall notify the Architect and Construction Manager. The Owner and the Architect, in consultation with the Construction Manager, shall thereafter agree to a corresponding change in the Project’s scope and quality. Compensation for services will be based on established contracted hourly rate and approval of proposed changes to contracted lump sum. PAGE 18 § 6.3 The Owner shall require the Construction Manager to include appropriate contingencies for design, bidding or negotiating, price escalation, and market conditions in estimates of the Cost of the Work. The Architect shall be entitled to rely on the accuracy and completeness of estimates of the Cost of the Work the Construction Manager prepares as the Architect progresses with its Basic Services. The Architect shall prepare, as an Additional Service, revisions to the Drawings, Specifications or other documents required due to the Construction Manager’s inaccuracies or incompleteness in preparing cost estimates, or due to market conditions the Architect could not reasonably anticipate. The Architect may review the Construction Manager’s estimates solely for the Architect’s guidance in completion of its services, however, the Architect shall report to the Owner any material inaccuracies and inconsistencies noted during any such review.Intentional omitted. PAGE 19 § 7.1 The Architect and the Owner warrant that in transmitting Instruments of Service, or any other information, the transmitting party is the copyright owner of such information or has permission from the copyright owner to transmit such information for its use on the Project. If the Owner and Architect intend to transmit Instruments of Service or any other information or documentation in digital form, they shall endeavor to establish necessary protocols governing such transmissions. § 7.2 The Architect and the Architect’s consultants shall be deemed the authors and owners of their respective Instruments of Service, including the Drawings and Specifications, and shall Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Architect and its consultants are instruments of the Architect’s service through which the Work to be executed by the Contractor is described, and are the property of the Owner ("Instruments of Service"). Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Architect shall be responsible for the content of the Instruments of Service in accordance with its standard of care. The Architect, Contractor or any Subcontractor, or lower tier sub-subcontractor or supplier shall not own or claim a copyright in the Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Architect. The Owner will retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including copyrights. Submission or distribution of Instruments of Service in addition to the copyright. The Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Architect, and copies thereof furnished to the Contractor or any Subcontractor, or lower tier sub-subcontractor or supplier are for use solely with respect to this Project. They are not to be used by the Architect, Contractor, Subcontractor, or lower tier sub-subcontractor or supplier on other projects or for additions to this Project outside the scope of the Work without the specific written consent of the Owner, unless the item in question is an industry standard drawing, specification or detail. The Architect, Contractor, Subcontractors, and lower tier sub-subcontractors and suppliers are granted a limited license to use and reproduce applicable portions of the Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Architect appropriate to and for use in the execution of their Work. Submittal or distribution to meet official regulatory requirements or for similar other purposes in connection with the this Project is not to be construed as publication in derogation of the reserved rights of the Architect and the Architect’s consultants.Owner’s copyright or other reserved rights. § 7.3 The Architect grants to the Owner Upon execution of this Agreement, the Owner grants to the Architect a nonexclusive license to use the Architect’s Instruments of Service solely and exclusively for purposes of constructing, using, maintaining, altering and adding to the Project, provided that the Owner substantially performs its obligations under this Agreement, including prompt payment of all sums due, pursuant to Article 9 and Article 11. The Architect shall obtain similar nonexclusive licenses from Project. The Owner shall provide similar nonexclusive licenses to the Architect’s consultants consistent with this Agreement. The license granted under this section permits the Owner to authorize the Construction Manager, Subcontractors, Sub-subcontractors, and suppliers, as well as the Owner’s consultants and separate contractors, Architect and its subconsultants to reproduce applicable portions of the Instruments of Service, subject to any protocols established pursuant to Section 1.3, Service solely and exclusively for use in performing services or construction for the Project. If the Architect Owner rightfully terminates this Agreement for cause as provided in Section 9.4, the license granted in this Section 7.3 shall terminate.or for convenience as set forth herein, the license granted to the Architect shall terminate and the Architect shall provide all copies of the Instruments of Service to the Owner. Page 204 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 12 § 7.3.1 In the event the Owner uses the Instruments of Service without retaining the authors on projects other than the Project without retaining the author of the Instruments of Service, the Owner releases the Architect and Architect’s consultant(s) from all claims and causes of action arising from such uses. The Owner, to the extent permitted by law, further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Architect and its consultants from all costs and expenses, including the cost of defense, related to claims and causes of action asserted by any third person or entity to the extent such costs and expenses arise from the Owner’s use of the Instruments of Service on projects other than the Project under this Section 7.3.1. The terms of this Section 7.3.1 shall not apply if the Owner rightfully terminates this Agreement for cause under Section 9.4.cause. § 7.4 Except for the licenses granted in this Article 7, no other license or right shall be deemed granted or implied under this Agreement. The Owner Architect shall not assign, delegate, sublicense, pledge or otherwise transfer any license granted herein to another party without the prior written agreement of the Architect. Owner. Any unauthorized use of the Instruments of Service by the Architect shall be at the Owner’s Architect’s sole risk and without liability to the Architect and the Architect’s consultants.Owner. PAGE 20 § 7.6 The Architect must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to (1) all data provided by the City pursuant to this Agreement, and (2) all data, created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Architect pursuant to this Agreement. The Architect is subject to all the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, including but not limited to the civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes Section 13.08, as if it were a government entity. In the event the Architect receives a request to release data, the Architect must immediately notify the Owner. The Owner will give the Architect instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released. Architect agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the Owner, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any claims resulting from Architects officers’, agents’, owners’, partners’, employees’, volunteers’, assignees’ or subcontractors’ unlawful disclosure and/or use of protected data. The terms of this paragraph shall survive the cancellation or termination of this Agreement. … § 8.1.1 The Owner and Architect shall commence all claims and causes of action against the other and arising out of or related to this Agreement, whether in contract, tort, or otherwise, in accordance with the requirements of the binding dispute resolution method selected in this Agreement and within the period specified by applicable law, but in any case not more than 10 years after the date of Substantial Completion of the Work. . The Owner and Architect waive all claims and causes of action not commenced in accordance with this Section 8.1.1. . Pending final resolution of a claim, dispute or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement or agreed in writing by the Architect and the Owner, the Architect shall proceed diligently with the performance of its services for the Project as required by this Agreement and the Owner shall continue to make payments to the Architect that are due, owing and unpaid under the terms of this Agreement § 8.1.2 To the extent damages are covered by property insurance, the Owner and Architect waive all rights against each other and against the contractors, consultants, agents and employees of the other for damages, except such rights as they may have to the proceeds of such insurance as set forth in AIA Document A201–2017, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction. The Owner or the Architect, as appropriate, shall require of the Construction Manager, contractors, consultants, agents and employees of any of them, similar waivers in favor of the other parties enumerated herein. § 8.1.3 The Architect shall indemnify and hold the Owner and the Owner’s officers and employees officers, employees, and agents harmless from and against damages, losses and judgments arising from claims by third parties, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses recoverable under applicable law, but only to the extent they are caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the Architect, its employees and its consultants in the performance of professional services under this Agreement. The Architect’s obligation to indemnify and hold the Owner and the Owner’s officers and employees harmless does not include a duty to defend. The Architect’s duty to indemnify the Owner under this Section 8.1.3 shall be limited to the available proceeds of the insurance coverage required by under this Agreement. … Page 205 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 13 § 8.2.2 The Owner and Architect shall endeavor to resolve claims, disputes and other matters in question between them by mediation, which, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, shall be administered by the American Arbitration Association in accordance with its Construction Industry Mediation Procedures in effect on the date of this Agreement. mediation. A request for mediation shall be made in writing, delivered to the other party to this Agreement, and filed with the person or entity administering the mediation. The request may be made concurrently with the filing of a complaint or other appropriate demand for binding dispute resolution but, in such event, mediation shall proceed in advance of binding dispute resolution proceedings, which shall be stayed pending mediation for a period of 60 days from the date of filing, unless stayed for a longer period by agreement of the parties or court order. If an arbitration proceeding is stayed pursuant to this section, the parties may nonetheless proceed to the selection of the arbitrator(s) and agree upon a schedule for later proceedings.order PAGE 21 [ X ]Litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction … § 8.3 Arbitration § 8.3.1 If the parties have selected arbitration as the method for binding dispute resolution in this Agreement, any claim, dispute or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement subject to, but not resolved by, mediation shall be subject to arbitration, which, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, shall be administered by the American Arbitration Association in accordance with its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules in effect on the date of this Agreement. A demand for arbitration shall be made in writing, delivered to the other party to this Agreement, and filed with the person or entity administering the arbitration. § 8.3.1.1 A demand for arbitration shall be made no earlier than concurrently with the filing of a request for mediation, but in no event shall it be made after the date when the institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on the claim, dispute or other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. For statute of limitations purposes, receipt of a written demand for arbitration by the person or entity administering the arbitration shall constitute the institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on the claim, dispute or other matter in question. § 8.3.2 The foregoing agreement to arbitrate, and other agreements to arbitrate with an additional person or entity duly consented to by parties to this Agreement, shall be specifically enforceable in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. § 8.3.3 The award rendered by the arbitrator(s) shall be final, and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. § 8.3.4 Consolidation or Joinder § 8.3.4.1 Either party, at its sole discretion, may consolidate an arbitration conducted under this Agreement with any other arbitration to which it is a party provided that (1) the arbitration agreement governing the other arbitration permits consolidation; (2) the arbitrations to be consolidated substantially involve common questions of law or fact; and (3) the arbitrations employ materially similar procedural rules and methods for selecting arbitrator(s). § 8.3.4.2 Either party, at its sole discretion, may include by joinder persons or entities substantially involved in a common question of law or fact whose presence is required if complete relief is to be accorded in arbitration, provided that the party sought to be joined consents in writing to such joinder. Consent to arbitration involving an additional person or entity shall not constitute consent to arbitration of any claim, dispute or other matter in question not described in the written consent. § 8.3.4.3 The Owner and Architect grant to any person or entity made a party to an arbitration conducted under this Section 8.3, whether by joinder or consolidation, the same rights of joinder and consolidation as the Owner and Architect under this Agreement. § 8.4 The provisions of this Article 8 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. Page 206 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 14 § 9.1 If the Owner fails to make undisputed payments to the Architect for services properly performed and billed to the Owner and expenses properly incurred and billed to the Owner in accordance with this Agreement, such failure shall be considered substantial nonperformance and cause for termination or, at the Architect’s option, cause for suspension of performance of services under this Agreement. If the Architect elects to suspend services, Prior to such suspension, the Architect shall give seven days’ written notice to the Owner before suspending services. . In the event of a suspension of services, the Architect shall have no liability to the Owner for delay or damage caused the Owner because of such suspension of services. Before resuming services, the Owner shall pay the Architect all sums due prior to suspension and any expenses incurred in the interruption and resumption of the Architect’s services. for such services and expenses properly incurred and billed. The Architect’s fees for the remaining services and the time schedules shall be equitably adjusted.adjusted if the suspension exceeds forty-five (45) days. § 9.2 If the Owner suspends the Project, the Architect shall be compensated for services performed prior to notice of such suspension. When the Project is resumed, the Architect shall be compensated for expenses incurred in the interruption and resumption of the Architect’s services. The Architect’s fees for the remaining services and the time schedules shall be equitably adjusted. … § 9.4 Either party may terminate this Agreement upon not less than seven thirty (30) days’ written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the termination. … § 9.6 If the Owner terminates this Agreement for its convenience pursuant to Section 9.5, or the Architect terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 9.3, the Owner shall compensate the Architect for services performed prior to termination, Reimbursable Expenses incurred, and costs attributable to termination, including the costs attributable to the Architect’s termination of consultant agreements.termination. § 9.7 In addition to any amounts paid under Section 9.6, if the Owner terminates this Agreement for its convenience pursuant to Section 9.5, or the Architect terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 9.3, the Owner shall pay to the Architect the following fees: (Set forth below the amount of any termination or licensing fee, or the method for determining any termination or licensing fee.) .1 Termination Fee: .2 Licensing Fee if the Owner intends to continue using the Architect’s Instruments of Service: § 9.8 Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, this Agreement shall terminate one year from the date of Substantial Completion. § 9.9 The Owner’s rights to use the Architect’s Instruments of Service in the event of a termination of this Agreement are set forth in Article 7 and Section 9.7. Page 207 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 15 § 10.1 This Agreement shall be governed by the law of the place where the Project is located, excluding that jurisdiction’s choice of law rules. If the parties have selected arbitration as the method of binding dispute resolution, the Federal Arbitration Act shall govern Section 8.3.State of Minnesota without regard to conflict of laws principals. … § 10.3 The Owner and Architect, respectively, bind themselves, their agents, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to this Agreement. Neither the Owner nor the Architect shall assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other, except that the Owner may assign this Agreement to a lender providing financing for the Project if the lender agrees to assume the Owner’s rights and obligations under this Agreement, including any payments due to the Architect by the Owner prior to the Project. The Architect shall take all actions necessary to facilitate such assignment. PAGE 22 § 10.7 The Architect shall have the right to include photographic or artistic representations of the design of the Project among the Architect’s promotional and professional materials. The Architect shall be given reasonable access to the completed Project to make such representations. However, the Architect’s materials shall not include the Owner’s confidential or proprietary information if the Owner has previously advised the Architect in writing of the specific information considered by the Owner to be confidential or proprietary. The Owner shall provide professional credit for the Architect in the Owner’s promotional materials for the Project. or any other information prohibited by law from disclosure. This Section 10.7 shall survive the termination of this Agreement unless the Owner terminates this Agreement for cause pursuant to Section 9.4. … § 10.8.1 The receiving party may disclose "confidential" or "business proprietary" information after 7 days’ notice to the other party, when required by law, arbitrator’s order, or court order, including a subpoena or other form of compulsory legal process issued by a court or governmental entity, or to the extent such information is reasonably necessary for the receiving party to defend itself in any dispute. The receiving party may also disclose such information to its employees, consultants, or contractors in order to perform services or work solely and exclusively for the Project, provided those employees, consultants and contractors are subject to the restrictions on the disclosure and use of such information as set forth in this Section 10.8. … § 10.10 To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Architect hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the Owner, it officers, employees, and agents (collectively the "Indemnities") harmless from all losses, claims, liabilities, injuries, damages, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, that the Indemnities may incur to the extent arising out of the negligent performance or lack of performance by the Architect of its duties and obligations under or pursuant to this Agreement. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Owner hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the Architect, it officers, employees, and agents (collectively the "Architect Indemnities") harmless from all losses, claims, liabilities, injuries, damages, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, that the Architect Indemnities may incur to the extent arising out of the negligent performance or lack of performance by the Architect of its duties and obligations under or pursuant to this Agreement. § 10.11 Time is of the essence of this Agreement. § 10.12 Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, the Owner’s review and approval of any and all documents or other matters required herein shall be for the purpose of providing the Architect with information as to the Owner’s objectives and goals with respect to the Project and not for the purpose of determining the accuracy, PAGE 23 Page 208 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 16 .2 Percentage Basis (Insert percentage value) ( ) % of the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work, as calculated in accordance with Section 11.6. .3 Other (Describe the method of compensation) Two hundred eighty one thousand, seven hundred forty dollars $281,740 … Included in base services. Certification costs to be paid by Owner … Exhibit 1 … Architects Consultants are billed at no additional fees added … Schematic Design Phase twenty percent (20 %) Design Development Phase twenty one percent ( 21 %) Construction Documents Phase thirty two percent (32 %) Construction Phase twenty seven percent (27 %) … § 11.6.1 When compensation is on a percentage basis and any portions of the Project are deleted or otherwise not constructed, compensation for those portions of the Project shall be payable to the extent services are performed on those portions. The Architect shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with this Agreement for all services properly performed whether or not the Construction Phase is commenced. § 11.7 The hourly billing rates for services of the Architect and the Architect’s consultants are set forth below. The rates shall be adjusted in accordance with the Architect’s and Architect’s consultants’ normal review practices. provided such rates and practices are approved by Owner PAGE 24 Exhibit 1 … § 11.8.2 For Reimbursable Expenses the compensation shall be the expenses incurred by the Architect and the Architect’s consultants plus percent ( %) of the expenses incurred. Reimbursable expenses are in addition to above fee and will be invoiced at 1 times actual cost. § 11.9 Architect’s Insurance. If the types and limits of coverage required in Section 2.6 are in addition to the types and limits the Architect normally maintains, the Owner shall pay the Architect for the additional costs incurred by the Architect for the additional coverages as set forth below: Page 209 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 17 (Insert the additional coverages the Architect is required to obtain in order to satisfy the requirements set forth in Section 2.6, and for which the Owner shall reimburse the Architect.) … § 11.10.1.1 An No initial payment of ($ ) shall be made upon execution of this Agreement and is the minimum payment under this Agreement. It shall be credited to the Owner’s account in the final invoice. … § 11.10.2.1 Unless otherwise agreed, payments for services shall be made monthly in proportion to services performed. Payments are due and payable upon presentation of the Architect’s invoice. Amounts unpaid thirty five ( 35 ) days after the invoice date shall bear interest at the rate entered below, or in the absence thereof at the legal rate prevailing from time to time at the principal place of business of the Architect. … 0.05 % one-half percent The Architect’s invoice shall be submitted in a format acceptable to the Owner, and shall show sufficient information to allow the Owner to determine the propriety thereof. At a minimum, each invoice shall state services completed during the billing period, amount due for Services performed during the billing period, amount previously paid, and agreed contract balance remaining. The Architect shall be paid in the time period set forth in the Prompt Payment of Local Government Bills law, Minnesota Statutes § 471.425. § 11.10.2.2 The Owner shall not withhold amounts from the Architect’s compensation to impose a penalty or liquidated damages on the Architect, or to offset sums requested by or paid to contractors for the cost of changes in the Work, unless the Architect agrees or has been found liable for the amounts in a binding dispute resolution proceeding. § 11.10.2.3 Records of Reimbursable Expenses, expenses pertaining to Supplemental and Additional Services, and services performed on the basis of hourly rates shall be available to the Owner at mutually convenient times.times, and shall be maintained by Architect for three (3) years after Final Completion. PAGE 25 This Agreement supersedes any prior or contemporaneous representations or agreements, whether written or oral, between the Parties and contains the entire agreement. Any modification or amendment of to this Agreement shall require a written agreement signed by both Parties. In the hiring of employees to perform work under this Agreement, the Contractor shall not discriminate against any person by reason of any characteristic or classification protected by state or federal law. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. All proceedings related to this Agreement shall be venued in Hennepin County, Minnesota 12.1 179D(d)(4) Energy Tax Allocation for Designers of Buildings for Tax-Exempt Owners. Government and Nonprofit entities qualify as Tax-Exempt Building Owners. The Owner agrees to allocate to the Architect and the Architect’s participating and responsible Consultants all Section 179D tax deductions dedicated the Designers of energy efficient commercial property, provided these commercial property improvements qualify for allocations per the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Section 179D, Notice 2008-40, and updates included in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Upon achieving Substantial Completion for the Project, the Architect will prepare and submit the Form of Allocation letter to the Owner for approval on behalf of the design team and participating Consultants. The Architect and Architect’s participating Consultants will maintain records as are sufficient to establish the entitlement to, and amount of, any deduction claimed by the Consultant relevant to 179D per IRS regulations. Reference: As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress enacted Section 179D of the Internal Revenue Code to encourage the energy efficient design and construction of new or renovated properties. Notice 2008-40 of Internal Revenue Bulletin 2008-14 and applicable updates included in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 provides that in the case of a Page 210 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B133 – 2019. Copyright © 2014, and 2019. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 18 government owned property (Federal, State or Local government or political subdivision), and qualifying not-for-profit entities, the deduction for energy efficient buildings may be allocated to the designer for the taxable year that includes the date on which the property was placed in service. These tax allocations are not possible to claim as a government entity, or a not-for-profit entity, and are therefore assigned to the responsible designer(s) of qualifying energy efficient property incorporated into the Project. A designer may include, for example, an architect, engineer, environmental consultant, or energy services provider, who creates the technical specification [plans and specifications] for a new building, existing building renovation, or an addition to an existing building that incorporates an energy efficient property allowed under Section 179D. 12.2 Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.425, subd. 4a, the Architect must pay any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the Architect’s receipt of payment from the Owner for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Architect must pay interest of one and one-half percent (1½ %) per month or any part of a month to subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is $10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Architect shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Architect shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney’s fees, incurred in bringing the action. PAGE 26 .2 Building Information Modeling Exhibit, if completed:AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, dated as indicated below, if completed, or the following: (Insert the date of the E203-2013 incorporated into this agreement.) … [ X ] Other Exhibits incorporated into this Agreement: … Exhibit 1 Rate Schedule OPN Architects Emanuelson-podos Meyer Borgman Johnson Exhibit 2 Fees … Exhibit 3: Proposal of Professional Architectural and Engineering Services … Joseph Wallace, AIA Associate Principal MN License #: 61723 Page 211 of 1086 AIA Document D401 – 2003. Copyright © 1992 and 2003. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1262909768) 1 ’Certification of Document s Authenticity AIA®™ – 2003 Document D401 I, Scott Neal, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, that I created the attached final document simultaneously with its associated Additions and Deletions Report and this certification at 13:05:55 ET on 12/11/2024 under Order No. 2114499103 from AIA Contract Documents software and that in preparing the attached final document I made no changes to the original text of AIA® Document B133™ – 2019, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect, Construction Manager as Constructor Edition, other than those additions and deletions shown in the associated Additions and Deletions Report. _____________________________________________________________ (Signed) _____________________________________________________________ (Title) _____________________________________________________________ (Dated) Page 212 of 1086 Cedar Rapids 200 Fifth Avenue SE Ste. 201 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401 (319) 363-6018 Des Moines 100 Court Avenue Ste. 100 Des Moines, Iowa 50309 (515) 309-0722 Iowa City 24 ½ S. Clinton Street Ste. 1 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 363-6018 Madison 301 N. Broom Street Ste. 100 Madison, Wisconsin 53703 (608) 819-0260 Minneapolis 212 N. 3rd Avenue Ste. 312 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 468-6851 opnarchitects.com Principal $250 Associate Principal $200 Practice Leader $200 Associate $180 Senior Project Manager/Senior Project Architect $155 Project Manager/Project Architect $140 Architect $115 Intern Architect 3 $105 Intern Architect 1-2 $85 Senior Interior Designer $120 Interior Designer $95 Construction Administrator $105 Architectural Technician $85 Directors of Business Support $140 Business Support Specialist $100 Marketing Specialist $95 Administrative Support $70 College Interns $50 OPN ARCHITECTS Hourly Rates – 2024 These rates are subject to an annual adjustment on or around January 1, and your contract will adjust accordingly. Page 213 of 1086 SCHEDULE OF HOURLY RATES Effective January 1, 2024 Senior Partner $260 Partner / Director $220 Engineer IV $210 Engineer III $160 Engineer II $140 Engineer I $120 Designer IV $170 Designer III $140 Designer II $120 Designer I $105 Administrative $125 Drafter $ 90 SCHEDULE OF REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES Effective January 1, 2024 Automobile Mileage (IRS Rate) $ 0.67/mi Paper Plots – B/W $ 0.25/sf Paper Plots – Color $ 0.88/sf Deliveries at cost Professional Services at cost Airfare/Hotels/Meals at cost Page 1 of 1 Page 214 of 1086 510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 900 | Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.338.0713 | mbjeng.com MBJ Standard Hourly Rates 2023-2024 Principal IV $290.00 BIM Specialist III $140.00 Principal III $250.00 BIM Specialist II $120.00 Principal II $230.00 BIM Specialist I $105.00 Principal I $215.00 Technical Specialist V $175.00 Engineer V $215.00 Technical Specialist IV $155.00 Engineer IV $190.00 Technical Specialist III $140.00 Engineer III $160.00 Technical Specialist II $120.00 Engineer II $140.00 Technical Specialist I $105.00 Engineer I $125.00 Office III $185.00 BIM Specialist V $170.00 Office II $135.00 BIM Specialist IV $150.00 Office I $100.00 Hourly rates are adjusted periodically but will not exceed 10% annually. Page 215 of 1086 Attachment A: Architectural / Engineering Fee Worksheet/Questionnaire FRED RICHARDS FACILITY 10.19.2024 RFQ for Architectural / Engineering Services Architectural / Engineering Fee Comments Programming & Preliminary Design (Fixed price including reimbursables) $ Schematic Design (Expressed as Fixed Cost of Work) $ Design Development including GMP Documents (Expressed as fixed Cost of Work) $ Construction Documents (Expressed as fixed Cost of Work) $ Construction Administration including Bidding/Negotiations (Expressed as fixed Cost of Work) $ Estimate for Reimbursable Expenses for SD, DD, CD, and CA (Reimbursed by City on an as-incurred basis) $ LEED Silver (If pursued. Expressed as a fixed Cost of Work) $ FF&E (Expressed as Fix cost to provide specifications, layouts, and procurement, installation, punch list and overall management of selected consultants) $ $ On a separate attachment, please include or comment on the following: 1.Confirmation that if revisions to the construction documents are required to comply with the GMP, you will incorporate the required revisions into the construction documents without additional fee or expense to Owner unless the revisions are necessary because of the CMAR’s inaccuracies or incompletions in preparing the GMP 2. Provide schedule of hourly rates for personnel including clarification of Direct Personnel Expense (DPE) basis used in arriving at such rates. 3. Clarify excluded services and limiting conditions, including any to be noted in Article 1.1.10 and/or Article 4 of the B133-2019. 4.Clarify compensation basis/override to AE for services of AE consultants not included as part of Basic Services. 5.Provide recommended % of design contingency at each stage of design services. 6. Clarify compensation basis/override to AE for reimbursable expenses 1 of 1 15,716 Inclusive of community engagement and city visioning 29,188 47,149 70,724 61,743 Assumes construction of 26 wks. Will coordinate with CM@R 680 Includes in town travel, mail/ship services, and printing during design at the standard gov't rate 36,200 20,340 AV and IT (Expressed as Fix cost to provide specifications, layouts, procurement, installation, punch list and overall management of selected consultants) Or B3 documentation/cert per Addendum #1 Page 216 of 1086 Comments to Attachment A: 1. Confirmation that if revisions to the construction documents are required to comply with the GMP, you will incorporate the required revisions into the construction documents without additional fee or expense to Owner unless the revisions are necessary because of the CMAR’s inaccuracies or incompletions in preparing the GMP a. Confirmed 2. Provide schedule of hourly rates for personnel including clarification of Direct Personnel Expense (DPE) basis used in arriving at such rates. a. Included 3. Clarify excluded services and limiting conditions, including any to be noted in Article 1.1.10 and/or Article 4 of the B133-2019. a. None listed at this time 4. Clarify compensation basis/override to AE for services of AE consultants not included as part of Basic Services. a. AE Consultants are billed at their published rates with no additional fees added 5. Provide recommended % of design contingency at each stage of design services. a. Recommended design contingency is 15% through Schematic Design, 10% at Design Development, and between 5-7% through Construction Documentation. 6. Clarify compensation basis/override to AE for reimbursable expenses a. Reimbursable expenses are in addition to the above fee and will be invoiced at 1.0 times actual cost. Reimbursable expenses may include: authorized out-of-town travel, courier services, express mail, plan review fees, reproduction of project documents, photography, out-of-house digital processing, physical models, meals and mileage at the government standard rate. Sincerely, Joe Wallace, AIA Associate Principal Page 217 of 1086 Hourly Rate Pre-Design Schematic Design Design Dev. Const. Docs Bidding/ Const. Admin. Total Hours Team Member Total $185 10 8 8 8 4 38 $7,030 $125 32 32 48 96 104 312 $39,000 $105 40 48 96 172 356 $37,380 $90 8 8 16 6 38 $3,420 $80 48 80 144 288 20 580 $46,400 $170 4 12 16 $2,720 $135,950 $260 2 2 2 2 8 $2,080 $210 4 8 16 18 6 52 $10,920 $210 4 8 16 18 6 52 $10,920 $120 10 12 12 22 12 68 $8,160 $105 16 30 64 124 16 250 $26,250 $58,330 $250 2 2 2 2 8 $2,000 $180 8 8 20 24 8 68 $12,240 $125 4 16 24 60 24 128 $16,000 $30,240 7% 13% 21% 32% 27% 100% $224,520 $680 $36,200 $20,340 Supplemental Services FF&E Labor Total LEED Silver Reimbursables Architect Interior Designer Cost Estimator Fee Percentage By Phase Structural Engineering - MBJ JW Murphy Curran (Principal) Lindsey Lyrenmann (Project Manager) Engineer Scott Vander Heiden (PIC) Brian Ringsven (Sr. Mech Designer) Matt Beckett (Sr. Elec Designer) Benjamin Bahr (Energy Modeling Lead) Engineer 1 Architecture - OPN Architects Joe Wallace (PIC) Nick Woods (PM) Intern 1 MEPT - Emmanuelson-Podas City of Edina - Fred Richards Park New Facility & Renovation Page 218 of 1086 Qualifications for Professional Architectural & Engineering Services CITY OF EDINA Fred Richards Park Facility November 15, 2024 Page 219 of 1086 Dear members of the selection committee, At OPN Architects, we embrace our responsibility to care for each other and our planet through extraordinary design and a boundary-free practice. We understand that the City of Edina is seeking a proposal for professional architectural and engineering services for two projects at Fred Richards Park as part of the next step in implementing your Park Master Plan. The new building and the renovated building must integrate both aesthetically and functionally into the existing park layout and infrastructure. This project presents an opportunity to construct a new 2,500 to 3,000-square-foot space for community gathering while also transforming the old clubhouse into a trailhead. More than these technical requirements, though, we appreciate that this step represents a pivotal moment. This new building will be more than a park building. It is a physical manifestation of your master plan, which reflects how Edina is evolving to meet the needs of your growing community. Parks are a place for the community to gather, a place for sharing ideas and more - a stage on which community acts together. The Fred Richards Park project presents a unique opportunity to build upon an existing destination for both residents and visitors. The proposed buildings adds to the promise of complemeting and contributing to and already a thriving park with vital spaces, aligned with the city’s values and guided by the Edina Values Viewfinder model. OPN Architects is a Minneapolis-based design firm with more than 110 designers in three states. OPN offers a holistic blend of architecture, planning, and interior design services. We have an intentionally diverse list of clients and project types including libraries, education, public safety, health care, historic, corporate, and recreation. In the last five years, more than 75% of our work has been publicly funded projects. By providing all disciplines relating to the aesthetics of the design in-house, we are able to ensure the design is unified from building envelope to interior design and furnishings. For this project, we have assembled a subconsultant team that brings experience in similar projects and with the City of Edina. Emanuelson-Podas, a mechanical, electrical, and plumbing engineering firm, is based in Edina, just minutes from the park. Our structural engineers, MBJ, have worked on numerous projects both public and private in the community. We understand that Confluence authored the parks master plan and continues to be contracted with the city as the landscape architect for this project. OPN and Confluence have a decades long history of collaboration on many projects, including two recent projects for the City of West Des Moines Parks & Recreation Department. As a team, we will leverage our deep portfolio of people-focused spaces designed with and for the community to find opportunities, not just solutions for the facilities at Fred Richards Park. We cannot wait to show you what OPN and our consultant team can do to meet and exceed your expectations. Please do not hesitate to reach out should you have questions. Sincerely, Joe Wallace, AIA Principal-in-Charge We design public spaces with purpose. Cover Image: Ellis Golf Course Clubhouse Page 220 of 1086 Firm Description & Experience Ellis Golf Course Clubhouse Page 221 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA2 Primary contact Joe Wallace, Assoc. Principal 323 N. Washington Ave. Ste 200 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 523-2110 jwallace@opnarchitects.com Size of Firm: 103 Services • Architecture • Interior Design & FFE • LEED Planning & Implementation • Master Planning • Sustainable Design OPN’s architects and interior designers embrace our responsibility to care for each other and our planet through extraordinary design and a boundary-free practice. Our commitment to excellence and our clients results in people-driven, award- winning designs. We are a regional design firm with more than 111 designers in Madison, Wisconsin, Cedar Rapids, Des Moines, and Iowa City, Iowa, and Minneapolis, Minnesota. OPN offers a holistic blend of architecture, planning, and interior design services. We have an intentionally diverse list of clients and project types including libraries, education, public safety, health care, historic, corporate, and recreation. By providing all disciplines relating to the aesthetics of the design in-house, we are able to ensure the design is unified from site selection to building envelope to interior design and furnishings. Firm Description Services • Architecture • Interior Design & FFE • LEED Planning & Implementation • Master Planning • Sustainable Design Location: Edina, Minnesota At Emanuelson-Podas, we’ve been bringing air, power, light and water to the places that matter for 65 years. We do it creatively. We do it efficiently. We do it sustainably. And we do it in a manner that provides extraordinary value to everyone involved with the project. Emanuelson-Podas (EP) is a mechanical and electrical engineering firm specializing in the design of HVAC, building automation, plumbing, lighting, power, communications, life/safety, power generation and sustainable building systems, and offering full building commissioning, energy modeling, and refrigeration engineering services. Our experience in a broad range of markets provides us with a healthy, valuable perspective when considering building design solutions. Services • Structural Design for new buildings, expansions, renovations • Building Information Modeling • Sustainable Design • Structural Evaluation • Protective Design • Integrated Steel Design Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota Meyer Borgman Johnson (MBJ) is a multi-specialty structural design practice structuring places that shape lives. Our 65+ years of experience covers all types of structural systems and delivery methods, including complex, phased projects requiring multiple bid packages, design-build, CMR, and integrated project delivery. We offer a full range of structural engineering services for new construction, building rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse, such as structural design, construction documents, field observation, design analysis, feasibility studies, special inspections, condition surveys, and others. As early adopters of BIM, we work skillfully in a shared 3D virtual environment, an approach that stimulates early design decisions and streamlines coordination processes as design develops. MBJ has worked on more than 35 projects in Edina. Page 222 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA3 Project ManagerNick Woods, AIADesign & Project Management Structural EngineerLindsey Lyrenmann, PE, SE Structural Design Principal-In-Charge Joe Wallace, AIA Client Point of Contact Project Oversight, Design Excellence, Client Expectations Lead Engineer J.W. Murphy Curran, PE, SE Engineering Oversight Team Overview ArchitectureOPN ARCHITECTSStructural EngineeringMEYER BORGMAN JOHSONElectrical Engineer Kelly Artz, PE, RCDD, LEED AP BD+C, WELL AP Electrical Engineer, Technology Designer, Low Voltage Specialist Mechanical Engineer/Managing Partner Scott Vander Heiden, PE, LEED AP B+C Partner Lead & Mechanical Engineer ME Engineering & B3 DesignEMANUELSON PODUSAn Associate Principal in Minneapolis, Joe has had extensive experience working with vast range of clients and project types, both complex and small, including the Raccoon River Park Facility & Boathouse for the City of West Des Moines for the Parks & Recreation Department. Joe is passionate about sustainable design and explores these concepts while leading project design teams and consultants towards thoughtful and award-winning design solutions. Joe spends his free time with his family on bike, hiking and river trails in the region. Joe Wallace, AIA | Associate Principal, Principal-in-Charge Raccoon River BoathouseA central hub for river recreation, as well as year-roud indoor restrooms and concessions run by the West Des Moines Park & Recreation Department. Designed to be net-zero energy & with resilient materials and measures to recover quickly from flood events. . Jamie Hurd Amphitheater A flexible destination for concerts, movies, and festivals run by the West Des Moines Park & Recreation Department with integrated public art. Indianola Stadium & FieldhouseA new 2,900 square foot concession building, 7,600 square foot locker room building, and entry structure on the north side of the existing stadium. A field house comprised of four athletic courts, recreational and competition tracks, a meeting room, a flexible exercise area, office spaces, and concessions. Kirkendall Public Library A new library and city hall council chambers as part of a new civic campus development. EducationBachelor of Architecture, 2010Master of Architecture, 2012 University of Nebraska – Lincoln Licenses & CredentialsLicensed Architect: MN, IANational Council of Architectural Registration Boards Professional AffiliationsAmerican Institute of Senior Mechanical Designer Brian Ringsven Mechanical Designer Senior Electrical DesignerMatt Beckett Electrical Designer Mechanical Designer & Energy Modeler Benjamin Bahr, PE, LEED AP, BD +C Energy Modeling Lead Civil Engineering/Landscape Confluence AV/IT City’s Preferred Vendors Page 223 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA4 Team Resume Nick has been practicing architecture since 2004 at multiple award-winning firms in Wisconsin and Minnesota. He graduated from Virginia Tech with a Bachelor of Architecture, and continued his education at Washington University–St. Louis and received his Master of Architecture. Nick has joined our newest office studio location in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Inspired by the way people experience buildings, spaces, and materials can impact them, Nick is interested in how architecture either tells a story, or inspires one. Nick Woods, AIA | Project Architect, Project Manager Maple Grove Central Park*A new Ice Maintenance Building for Central Park in Maple Grove, Minnesota Rudd Public Library New public library on a new site positioned next to the community’s recreation center Hudson Police HeadquartersA facilities space needs assessment and preliminary design for a new Police Headquarters. Hiawatha Academy Northrop Campus* A college prepatory school for grades 5 to 8 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Excell Academy for Higher Learning*New building for a public Charter school located in Brooklyn Park, Minnesota serving grades Pre K- 8th Robbinsdale Community School District Interior and accessibility renovations at Neill and FAIR Crystal Elementary Schools EducationBachelor of Architecture Virginia Tech, 2002 Master of Architecture Washington University-St. Louis, 2004 Licenses & CredentialsLicensed Architect: MN, WINational Council of Architectural Registration Boards Murphy serves as Principal-In-Charge or Structural Engineer of Record taking on a wide range of responsibilities that include design direction and decision-making, structural team oversight, structural coordination with other project disciplines, and budget and contract management. Murphy is experienced with all types of structural systems and materials and brings a highly creative approach to all his projects. With exceptional communication and organizational skills, he leads each project focusing on efficiency and constructability while supporting the project’s aesthetic elements. J.W. Murphy Curran, PE, SE | Principal, Lead Engineer Camp Tanadoona Dining Hall, Excelsior, MN City of Apple Valley Cobblestone Park Pavilion Restroom Building, Apple Valley, MN City of Eagan Bridle Ridge Park Building, Eagan, MN City of Eagan Trapp Farm Park Pavilion, Eagan, MN City of Excelsior Commons Bandshell, Excelsior, MN City of Minneapolis Graco Park Pavillion, Minneapolis, MN EducationBachelor of Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota, 2004 Licenses & CredentialsLicensed Professional Engineer in CT, MN (# 47174), NH, NY, and RI; Licensed Structural Engineer in IL Page 224 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA5 Lindsey is experienced with all major structural materials including concrete, steel, and wood. Having worked on the west coast, she is also skilled in seismic design and analysis. Her project portfolio encompasses both new and existing buildings in a variety of markets including healthcare, research and technology, education, sports, residential, and commercial. She is passionate about understanding and communicating the environmental impact of structural design decisions and is principally focused on collaborating with design teams toward common goals to reduce embodied carbon and support the creation of healthy spaces. Lindsey Lyrenmann, PE, SE | Associate, Structural Engineer City of Excelsior Commons Bandshell Excelsior, MN City of St. Paul Phalen Trailhead and Pavilion St. Paul, MN Dakota County Big Rivers Regional Trail Shelter Mendota Heights, MN Lakewood Cemetery Welcome CenterMinneapolis, MN Minnesota Zoo Treetop Trail Apple Valley, MN SWWD Glacial Valley Interpretive Area Pavilion Cottage Grove, MN EducationMaster of Science in Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 2012; Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering, Michigan State University, 2010 Licenses & CredentialsLicensed Professional Engineer in CA and MN (# 61568); Licensed Structural Team Resume Scott is a managing partner and registered mechanical engineer with 25 years of experience as a consulting engineer. He has extensive experience designing HVAC, plumbing, piping, fire protection and building automation systems, as well as project management and construction administration expertise. Scott is a LEED-accredited professional and has a special focus on leading and designing sustainable projects, with multiple LEED-registered projects under his belt. Scott Vander Heiden, PE, LEED AP BD+C | Managing Partner | Role: Partner Lead & Mechanical Engineer Three Rivers Park DistrictMississippi Gateway Regional Park Brooklyn Park, Minn. Lions Central Park (Triangle) PavillionRogers, Minn. City of Roseville Park Shelters Multiple structures Roseville, Minn. Lake Elmo Park Reserve Winter Recreation Facility (Nordic Center) Lake Elmo, Minn. Lebanon Hills Mountain Bike TrailheadEagan, Minn. Minnehaha Park Refectory Building Minneapolis, Minn. Big Rivers Regional TrailheadDakota County, Minn. St. Croix Bluffs Regional Park Park Center Building Hastings, Minn. Highland Park Pool House St. Paul, Minn. EducationBachelor of Science Mechanical Engineering, South Dakota State Univ. Licenses & Credentials Professional Engineer, MN #40918 LEED Accredited Professional Page 225 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA6 Team Resume Kelly is an integral member of the electrical and technology teams at EP. He has 25 years of experience working across a range of market sectors with particular strength in the education market. He is directly involved in all aspects of electrical design, including lighting, power, fire alarm, telecommunications and security systems. His status as a Registered Communications Distribution Designer (RCDD) demonstrates his exceptional skill in telecommunications design. Kelly has worked on multiple public park and recreation projects, including, Three Rivers Park District - Mississippi Gateway Regional Park; Lake Elmo Park Reserve Winter Recreation Facility; St. Croix Bluffs Regional Park, Park Center Building; Conway Park Dome; Lebanon Hills Mountain Bike Trailhead; Minnehaha Park Refectory Building; and Big Rivers Regional Trailhead. Kelly Artz, PE, RCDD, LEED AP BD+C | Partner | Role: Electrical Engineer, Technology Designer, Low Voltage Specialist Brian Ringsven has been involved in the engineering field for more than 30 years. He has a diverse background which includes HVAC and plumbing design in the corporate and financial sectors, as well as with K-12 school facilities, churches, public works facilities, restaurants, tenant build-out projects, and sports/recreational facilities. Brian works tirelessly to provide the most appropriate solution to the need, balancing cost, efficiency, complexity and the owner’s goals. His attention to detail has proven to be a key attribute in delivering high quality designs – that work the first time. Brian has worked on multiple public park and recreation projects, including, Lake Elmo Park Reserve Winter Recreation Facility; St. Croix Bluffs Regional Park, Park Center Building; CIty of Rosevill Park Shelters; Big Rivers Regional Trailhead; Harmon Oark Building in St. Paul; Highland Park Pool House in St. Paul; and Luc Lavon Park Building in Burnsville. Brian Ringsven | Senior Mechanical Designer | Role: Mechanical Designer Matt has more than 23 years of experience designing electrical systems for the financial, education, fitness, civic, office, retail, and restaurant sectors. He is directly involved in all aspects of electrical design, including lighting, lighting control, power distribution, fire alarm, and telecommunications. He works on all phases of design from the initial study through construction documents. Matt diligently implements the design by closely collaborating with the owner, architect and the contractors in the field – always striving to provide the best overall solution. Matt has worked on multiple public park and recreation projects, including: Big Rivers Regional Trailhead; and Tewapa Picnic Shelter and Pavilion and Park Shelter and Warming House for the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community at Prior Lake, Minn. Matt Beckett | Senior Electrical Designer | Role: Electrical Designer Benjamin also leads the firm’s energy modeling practice and has earned accolades from across the industry for his commitment to achieving innovative, energy-conscious designs. He has performed numerous Net Zero, LEED, Green Communities, Energy Star, Minnesota B3/SB2030, Green Star, Utility Allowance, 179D Tax Reduction, and State Energy Code compliant models. Ben has worked on B3 projects such as:Higher Ground St. Paul, St. Paul, Minn.; Newport R&E Center Building, in Newport, Minn.; Redwood/Renville County Transfer Station, Redwood Falls, Minn.; and Deed Conway Center Park Renovation, St. Paul. Benjamin Bahr, PE, LEED AP BD+C | Mechanical Designer & Energy Modeler Role: Energy Modeling Lead Page 226 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA7 Park Facility Experience Urbandale Walker Johnson Park Shelter Twinning Park Shelter Rand Park Pavilion Schram Park Pavilion Raccoon River Park Boathouse Green Square Park Jamie Hurd Amphiteater Bright Grandview Golf Course Clubhouse Ellis Golf Course Clubhouse Robert D. Ray Asian Garden Merchants Bonding Outdoor Patio Johnston City Hall Concessions Indianola High School Stadium Concessions I-35 Stadium Concessions EMC Overlook& Shelter at Macrae Park Twin Rivers Park Fort Dodge Park Shelter Dunlap Park Shelter Riverfront Crossings Park Shelter Pearson Park Shelter Greenwood Park Shelter Spirit Lake Mini-Wakan Shelter Story City Community Park Shelter Iowa State Fair Grounds Tornado Shelter College Community Stadium Concessions Emeis Clubhouse Current/Prior Experience with Municipal Projects City of Ankeny City Hall & Public Library City of Bondurant New Fire & Emergency Services Facility City of Burlington New Fire Station City of Carroll City Hall Renovation Public Library Addition & Renovation City of Cedar Falls Hearst Center for the Arts City of Cedar Rapids Convention Complex Center Fourth Avenue Parkade GTC Parkade Greene Square Renovation Paramount Theatre Restoration Public Library Public Library - Westside Branch City of Davenport New Fire Station No. 3 New Fairmount Community Center City of Des Moines Fire Station Training Center Administration Building Municipal Services Building City of Hudson Police Station City of Iowa City Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center Renovation Court Avenue Parkade City of Johnston City Hall and Town Center Johnson County Emergency Services Building Health and Human Services Renovation City of Keokuk Pump Station Linn County Human Services Building Public Health & Development Building Lawrence County Public Library City of Madison Fire Station No. 14 Fire Station No. 6 Pinney Library Branch City of Marion Fire Station No. 1 City of Mount Vernon Lester Buresh Community Wellness Center City of Oskaloosa City Hall City of Oregon Public Library Polk County Iowa Hall of Pride Veterans Memorial Auditorium State of Wisconsin Villas Communication Hall Courtyard & Accessibility Improvements Bathroom & Program Space Remodel City of Superior FIre Station Renovation City of Waukee Public Safety Facility City Hall Renovation City of Waunakee Public Library City of Wauwatosa City Hall and Library Study City of West Des Moines City Hall Human Services Building Community Center City of Winterset City Hall Work for municipalities, counties, states, and the federal government has made up a large portion of our work in the past decade, with hundreds of completed projects ranging from small restroom renovations to nationally and internationally award-winning federal fire stations and many other new and renovated buildings of all scopes and sizes. We have been honored to serve as the architect for projects with cities, counties, city administrations, and city councils. Our work for these civic entities affords us an intimate familiarity with the local authorities, applicable codes, ordinances, and laws in the region and across the Midwest. On any project, but particularly for our civic clients, we work diligently to ensure the imperatives of time, budget, and schedule are met. We are proud of our track record of completing complex projects on time and budget. We take our job as the stewards of tax payers' dollars very seriously. Below is a sampling of our recent civic experience with community rooms, restrooms, concessions, and park services. Additional Municipal Public Spaces Page 227 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA8 The Emeis Clubhouse is located on the edge of a disadvantaged area of Davenport, Iowa. The goal for the new clubhouse is to reinvent the 65-year-old, 155-acre course – which has historically catered to the well-off – and revitalize the neighborhood by creating a destination for golfers and a permanent home for First Tee Golf, an organization which focusses on teaching the game of golf to kids from all Socio-economic backgrounds. The design was challenged to capture the ever changing and dynamic views between golfer and the green from various vantage points. The notion of “path” is explored in the concept, favoring the inconsistent – and arguably more provocative – over the consistent (such as a linear sidewalk or street). Also guiding design is biophilia and our human relationship to nature be a connector, blind to socioeconomic backgrounds, that might create a destination for avid golfers and those new to the sport, alike. The design responds to the first question through the use of natural materials, views to nature, creation of prospect and refuge, and dynamic and diffuse light as ideas embedded in the architecture that can reduce anxiety, stress and blood pressure while increasing mental acuity and serotonin. The building plan started with a simple rectangle, followed by intentional cuts which shape the building to align with important views. The roof has three simple slopes that complement the modified rectangle, resulting in a simple overall form with a continuously changing façade as viewed from different vantage points on the golf course. This dynamic façade is balanced with a material palette of only wood and glass on the exterior. The roof folds, along with the exterior wood slat screens, shape covered outdoor spaces that provide needed shading for the lobby and classroom. CITY OF DAVENPORT Emeis Clubhouse Location Davenport, Iowa Year 2025 (estimated) Size 6,800 square feet Cost $2,597,746 Contact Chad Dyson Director of Parks and Recreation chad.dyson@davenportiowa.com (563) 326-7817 Project Experience Page 228 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA9 CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS Ellis Clubhouse Following a derecho in 2020 that destroyed the existing clubhouse on a public golf course, there was an opportunity to re-imagine how a new clubhouse could take advantage of the extraordinary views while creating a community gathering space. The design of the new clubhouse is on track to be net zero and opens up to views of the 18th green and pond capturing the beauty of the 120-year-old course. The clubhouse is organized around a porch created by a single-slope roof that continues from exterior through the interior, connecting lower and higher volume spaces and opening up to the golf course. The interior spaces are organized axially along the porch with multiple entry points connecting to the high-traffic concessions and pro shop inside. The interior view corridor and circulation along the porch terminates at an inset patio that provides additional covered seating and adjoins an interior community room. Corrugated metal panels along three sides of the new clubhouse transition to alternating vertical spans of curtainwall facing the course. The structure, skin, glazing, and all systems are set on a strict building module that is carried into details such as the exposed metal panel fasteners, rain chains, and center concessions counters and casework. Photovoltaic panels cover the roof, offsetting electricity use to achieve a net zero goal. Interior functions are organized around a charcoal grey form that is carved away to reveal a continuous white clad transaction counter and bar that intentionally contrasts with the rest of the volume that features polished concrete floors, exposed painted steel structure, and structural wood roof deck. Location Cedar Rapids, Iowa Year 2022 Size 5,820 square feet Cost $2,100,000 Contact David Roe, PGA Golf Operations Superintendent (319) 286-5580 D.Roe@cedar-rapids.org Project Experience Page 229 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA10 Location West Des Moines, Iowa Year 2020 Size 2,800 square feet Cost $2,000,000 Contact Ryan Penning Parks and Recreation Director (515) 222-3448 OPN Architects and Confluence teamed to provide site design and landscape architecture services for a new boathouse to be located at Blue Heron Lake in West Des Moines, Iowa. The siting of this structure was unique in that the entire lower story of the Boathouse was designed to withstand the intermittent flooding that occurs seasonally within Raccoon River Park. The lower story of the structure provides kayak and other small water craft storage that park users can rent. There is access to a dock with 12 slips, an accessible kayak launch, and gathering space where park staff can instruct small groups on the use of the various equipment available. The upper story of the facility, which is accessed by stairs as well as an accessible ramp system, provides a rental and concession area as well as restrooms for the facility users. An upper terrace provides an area where park patrons can relax and enjoy the view of all that the lake has to offer. On-site personal kayak storage, bicycle racks, and a boat ramp are also available. The Raccoon River Park Boathouse opened in summer 2020, offering a connection to the growing water trail network of Central Iowa. CITY OF WEST DES MOINES Raccoon River Boathouse Project Experience Page 230 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA11 As part of the new city hall and Town Center campus, the Johnston concessions and restrooms pavillion is situated in the civic core of a new development in a growing mid-western suburb. The new facility combines function with art inside and out of their community spaces. Materials reflect the civic purpose, while also representing the community and site specifically. Limestone, wood, and metal on the exterior imbue civic permanence while emphasizing the building’s warmth and openness. The buildings and site were designed as an example for the community - to drive innovation, conserve energy, and utilize sustainable materials. Both the building and the site support community growth and expansion with flexibility to accommodate evolving needs. The space becomes a platform that acts as a front yard for the community, serving as a forum, plaza, amphitheater, market and events space to welcome and support its community. Ammenities include: bike trail head connected to regional trail network with public gender neutral restrooms, fix-it station, electric bike charging and maps; bike pump track; integration of public art, sculptures, murals; stage for concerts and outdoor movies; public green space that can host up to 8,000 people; venue for farmers market and food trucks w/ power for vendors; ice rink; splash pad; concessions and public restrooms. No water runs off the site — the site holds and retains all storm water. Most of the site water filters through pervious pavers that are part of the hard scape surfaces on site into an underground retention system. CITY OF JOHNSTON CITY HALL Concessions & Restrooms Location Johnston, Iowa Year 2020 Contact David Wilwerding Community Development Director (515) 727-7775 Project Experience Page 231 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA12 CITY OF DES MOINES Bright Grandview Clubhouse This municipal golf course, built in 1902, was badly in need of a makeover. The original clubhouse was in need of maintenance and had undergone many unsympathetic renovations over the years. City officials made the decision to construct a new clubhouse that would revitalize the neighborhood, become a much-needed community center, and change the image of the historic golf course for the entire community. Contextually, the clubhouse is located on the westernmost boundary of the golf course and the building’s west elevation fronts a residential neighborhood. The connection with the golf course is achieved through the use of extensive glazing inset with doors allowing for access to an outdoor terrace that extends the length of the building. These doors set up an organizational rhythm that translates throughout the building. This rhythm is reinforced on the exterior with the introduction of tensioned fabric panels that shade the glass from the morning sun while allowing for views of the course. A horizontal louvered sunshade is also employed on the east elevation. A simple steel structure, comprised of bays spaced at eleven feet, is articulated on both the interior and exterior of the building, and is complimented by lapped wood siding infill panels. A board- formed concrete foundation wall is exposed around the perimeter of the building, creating a plinth from which the steel structure rises. The lower level, a largely utilitarian space, provides storage for the course’s golf carts, while the main level houses the pro shop, bar, offices, and a dining room that can be used by the community for events. All of these functions work in concert to make the clubhouse a hub of activity for the neighborhood. Location Des Moines, Iowa Year 2012 Size 13,214 square feet Cost $2,230,000 Contact Jill Tenney, City Architect 602 Robert D Ray Drive Des Moines IA 50309 (515) 230-0000 Project Experience Page 232 of 1086 Approach to Fulfilling the Project Objective Raccoon River Boathouse Page 233 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA14 Pillar 1 • Strong Foundation • City infrastructure, facilities, technology, and equipment meets community needs now and in the future. Pillar II • Reliable Service • City services enhance the safety, wellbeing, and quality of life experienced in Edina. Pillar III • Livable City • City planning fosters healthy, connected, sustainable development that enriches the lives of current and future residents. Pillar IV • Better Together • City government fosters an inclusive informed and engaged community Communication & Coordination of the Project Team Goals & Values Parks are a part of a community’s social fabric. As Edina continues to evolve, an updated park facility is an important step as you seek to optimize and embrace future needs of your community. They deserve dynamic and inviting spaces where people of all ages and abilities from diverse backgrounds can gather, socialize, and engage in events, activities, and programming. Our designs are a manifestation of our client’s goals and objectives influenced by environmental and community needs. Flexible & Adaptable Flexible meeting spaces, shared synergies, and outdoor spaces are all hallmarks of modern park facilities. These popular spots magnetize people to the space and entice them to stay. Your park is a place for community and gathering. It too should employ flexibility and provide amenities for being a go-to destination. Catalyzing Public Spaces A re-imagined park facility represents a unique opportunity to create a destination for community members of all generations to meet, mingle, and learn from one another. We work to intertwine buildings and site to build a framework for meaningful experiences. Spark Joy Human interaction is a vital component of a strong community. When people bond with their friends and neighbors, the entire community benefits from an improved quality of life, community pride, and increased civic participation. We can promote socialization by designing a variety of gathering spaces and taking measures to encourage spontaneous, friendly interactions. At OPN, we believe that the success of a project is predicated on understanding our clients: who they are, where they are today, and where they want to go tomorrow. We keenly value the importance of and encourage the participation of the leadership of key individuals from project kickoff through construction administration. We fundamentally believe that our clients are a critical part of our design process. We don’t take your role lightly.Before we begin design, we will form a project steering committee, with whom we will engage from kickoff through the first day in the triage center. Each member of the project steering committee has a unique perspective; your thoughts and ideas are extremely valuable. Together we will draft a project charter. During this exercise, each team member will have the opportunity to share their keys to the project’s success. This list will form our charter. As we work through the initial study and then onto the design and planning phases, we will use the charter to vet issues and decisions and validate our solution. Our team intends to utilize SharePoint, MS Teams, and Zoom to manage and communicate with all stakeholders throughout the duration of the project. All of our services, from the most basic to the most advanced, rely on the creation of 3D digital model. Our software of choice (and the industry standard) for producing 3D models is Autodesk Revit. We use our Revit models throughout the design process for programming, design, visualization, energy analysis, construction document creation, clash detection, cost estimation, and a myriad of other functions. Additionally, the team will utilize Enscape, MS Office Suite, SpecLink, and Bluebeam Revu for project design and presentations, development and construction documentation. Page 234 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA15 In an effort to design a library that truly reflects the needs and desires of the community unique to the westside of Cedar Rapids, OPN gathered feedback from area residents and neighbors. Through a series of open house events, community members were invited to share their thoughts on what they considered essential in a library. Both online and printed surveys were made available in multiple languages, including English, French, Spanish, and Swahili, to ensure inclusivity and accessibility. After compiling the community feedback, the design team, in collaboration with the library board, finalized a design concept. OPN organized additional open houses to present the proposed design to the public. Attendees had the opportunity to engage with visual renderings of the library, explore the site plan, and understand the overall orientation of the space. Throughout these events, attendees were encouraged to ask questions and engage with both the design team and library staff to gain deeper insights of the project. This inclusive approach not only solicited valuable feedback but also fostered a sense of ownership and collaboration within the community. Multi-faceted, multi-lingual outreach Tools & Technology At OPN, our practice is rooted in the traditional tools of trace paper and felt tip pens. It is also enhanced by today’s rapidly evolving technology landscape. We believe in using 21st century tools to design with more context to deliver buildings and spaces that elevate the human experience with precision and humanity. This approach enables us to apply our 40+ years of knowledge and experience to help our clients “see” their spaces differently, often before a shovel hits the ground, share their stories, and celebrate the culmination of a collaboration that will be our collective legacy. Below is a selection of the tools and services OPN offers that differentiate us from our peers: Early in our design process is a series of visioning sessions with stakeholders. These meetings will go beyond conversation, with pointed questions and discussion around architectural, emotive, and functional needs for your building. These conversations contribute to the vision for the project and inform the dialogue about design and needs. We use audience participation technology to work with large, diverse groups to define guiding principles and develop a shared understanding of the aesthetic style appropriate for this project. In a virtual world, we’ll bring your space to you. Whether during design, or during construction, we can help clients, community members and visitors visualize your space. Walkthroughs like the one above can be completed with renderings and 3D models. Community Feedback Form English The City of Cedar Rapids is looking for public feedback for a new Westside library to replace the existing Ladd Library. This larger and improved facility will accommodate the needs of Cedar Rapids residents for generations to come, especially on the Westside. This building is to be located close to the existing Ladd Library between Edgewood Road SW and Wiley Blvd. SW along 20th Ave SW. Thank you for sharing your feedback. Francaise La ville de Cedar Rapids cherche des impressions publiques pour une nouvelle bibliotheque de la côté ouest pour remplacer la bibliothèque existante la Ladd Library. Cette édifice plus grande et amélioré va subvenir les besoins des residents de Cedar Rapids pour des generations a venir, surtout celles de la côté ouest. Cette édifice sera située près de la bibliothèque existante la Ladd Library entre Edgewood Rd SW et Wiley Blvd. SW près de 20th Ave SW. Merci de partager vos impressions. EspanolaLa ciudad de Cedar Rapids busca comentarios públicos para una nueva biblioteca de lado oeste para remplazar la biblioteca existente la Ladd Library. Este edificio más grande y mejorado va a acomodar las necesidades de los residentes de Cedar Rapids para generaciones a venir, sobretodo ellas en el lado oeste. Este edificio estará ubicado cerca de la biblioteca existente la Ladd Library entre Edgewood Road SW y Wiley Blvd. SW cerca de 20th Ave SW. Gracias por compartir sus comentarios. Kiswahili Jiji la Cedar Rapids linatafuta maoni ya umma kwa maktaba mpya ya Westside kuchukua nafasi ya Maktaba ya Ladd iliyopo. Kituo hiki kikubwa na kilichoboreshwa kitatosheleza mahitaji ya wakazi wa Cedar Rapids kwa vizazi vijavyo, hasa katika eneo la Westside. Jengo hili litapatikana karibu na Maktaba iliyopo ya Ladd kati ya Edgewood Road SW na Wiley Blvd. SW kando ya 20th Ave SW. Asante kwa kushiriki maoni yako. 1/23/20, 3:32 PMPage 1 of 1 Powered by Mentimeter Select an Option 1st My top priorities for this project are: Select as many as you want in the order you prefer. There are 3 options in total. Submit Terms Innovation Strategies, Products, & Processes Tools & Technology Page 235 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA16 Our team takes a holistic approach to sustainability that results in buildings that are both beautiful and high performance. Our process puts people first by bringing a diversity of voices onto the team early and maintaining those connections throughout the life of the project. The work the city has done to date through the master planning process, suggest ways these park buildings could respond, such as: Visible Sustainability: A clubhouse has the unique potential to incorporate sustainable strategies that can be a design driver and a form giver. This is more than just a highly efficient building, but a reflection of the unique culture and climate of Fred Richard’s Park. In adding a new structure to the park, we want to both integrate it into the existing structures as well as the park itself. By touching the park as lightly as possible, we are demonstrating a respect for its natural surroundings. Living Laboratory: Climate change is the biggest challenge our society faces, and the construction and operation of buildings represent 40% of the total CO2 emitted globally. The clubhouse can address these challenges by focusing on 3 types of carbon emissions: transportational, operational, and embodied carbon. It can promote alternative transportation, commit to a Zero Net Energy or Zero Net Carbon facility, and reduce embodied carbon through innovative materials selection. These concepts would not only save the city money, they demonstrate what a good green future looks like to all who use it. A Social Forum: You’ve articulated a need for programming and spaces for all users as well as a physical connection between the park and its clubhouse. The design process can support that vision through a robust community engagement process that provides avenues for community feedback. We will work to provide a transparent way to communicate design decisions and progress to the broad stakeholder group. Beyond the planning process, the building must incorporate strategies that reinforce social equity and flexibility of programming, so that events and public opportunities are a component of building performance. One of the most sustainable buildings is one that is well loved, because it is well maintained, used, and active. We look at the potential for sustainability to transform the way we think through four broad themes throughout our practice: PERFORMANCE We seek to deliver exceptional design and high performance in every project. RESILIENCE We build environments that adapt and grow from adversity. CULTURE We foster open collaboration in our studios through a creative and flexible work environment. Sustainability, Equity, and Access aren’t separate from design. HEALTH We look beyond the building to determine how each unique environment serves its patrons. Innovation Strategies, Products, & Processes Tools & TechnologyTools & Technology High-Performing & Healthy Design Page 236 of 1086 Deliverables & Detailed Work Plan West Des Moines Jamie Hurd Ampitheatre Page 237 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA18 Project Kick-Off (12/10/2024) Our proposed approach is born of successful experience working on similar park projects. For this and all projects, we suggest a project kick-off with the parks and recreation department and city stakeholders during which we will work with you to clearly establish roles and responsibilities, identify project contacts and communication protocols, identify potential hurdles, determine any initial data needs, and verify our proposed schedule of work with confirmed dates for key project milestones and deliverables. Prior to this meeting, our planning team will review and evaluate the previously developed background documents. Programming and Preliminary Design (3 weeks) Bringing our recent experience designing park facilities for other clients, we will lead programming efforts to understand what works in your current facilities and what could work better, and any special nuances that may influence spatial needs. We understand that having a clear understanding of your operational needs is extremely important to the success of your project. However, also significant to this work is reviewing the mission, vision, values statements, demographic and economic information, previous planning and facilities studies, and historical and projected data. We will focus on the needs specific to the users, and compare against existing infrastructure. Our conversations will explore: • The nature of each building • Relationships between buildings • Optimal physical adjacencies • Sustainability goals Based on these conversations we will further refine project goals, identify community needs, adjacency requirements, space needs, and gain consensus around the strategies and technologies to be explored during schematic design. By the end of this step in pre-design we will have a detailed program listing all space needs for your park facility. During this phase we will also analyze and perform test fits on the site taking into consideration: landscape/urban environmental features, site access and accessibility features, user access, and parking. The next step of the process in the highly collaborative exploration and conceptualizing phase, is to study and evaluate a number of concepts that depict the idea for a design. We Programming & Preliminary Design • Virtual and in-person benchmarking and affinity exercises • Confirm sustainable site and building strategies and approach and develop a plan • Conduct programming sessions with department and city stakeholders • Participate and facility community engagement • Conduct site test fits, review property conditions, an conduct code & zoning reviews • Refine space block diagrams focusing on operational adjacencies. • Public Engagement as desired by the city Deliverables and Detailed Work Plan Schematic Design • Develop site, floor plan, and exterior scenarios for preferred scheme • Present schematic plans to the City and Department for feedback • Prepare preliminary project cost based on programming and preliminary design • Assist with development of preliminary master design/construction schedule. • Provide presentation quality drawings of conceptual designs including site plan(s), floor plans and interior and exterior renderings. • Provide 3-D conceptual image(s). • Revise plans as necessary to align with budget estimate before proceeding with design development Page 238 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA19 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA 17 base these studies on your budget and program, identified by and with you. As our team digests the programming goals and space needs and the design solutions begin to coalesce, we will continue open communication with the core team. Our conceptual plans will allow us to produce a preliminary cost estimate that you can use to refine your list of must haves. Schematic Design (5 weeks) The final Schematic Design Package will include floor plans, exterior elevations, sections, and details necessary to demonstrate design intent and direction. At the end of this phase we will review and present the preferred, refined concepts and preliminary material selections in a narrative report that will include an outline of preliminary project probable costs developed by the CMAR. Schematic design renderings produced by the selected design team will be presented by city staff. The final design from will be approved by the City before we proceed with subsequent phases. Design Development (6 weeks) Based on the approved schematic design documents, we will prepare detailed design development documents consisting of drawings and other outline specifications to describe the size, location, and character of each element of the entire project pertaining to architectural, civil, landscape, structural, mechanical and electrical systems, and materials. During this phase, the city will provide continued input to shape and refine the design including reviews at 50% and 100%. Microprogramming of individual spaces will occur. We will validate that the design is consistent with the City’s four budget pillars and values and uses the Edina Values Viewfinder model. Additionally, the design will adhere to the city’s sustainability goals, as well as any other chosen, including but not limited to the B3 design standards, SB2030 energy standards, or LEED program standards. Construction Documents (12 weeks) Upon approval of the design development documents, the design team prepares the final construction documents that will serve as basis for bidding and construction by the general contractor. Prior to the conclusion of this phase, we will submit CD documents to the CMAR and city to review for cost, constructability, sustainability, schedule, and value engineering. Following city review, comment and approval, if revisions are required to comply with the GMP, we will incorporate the required revisions into the construction documents without additional fee or expense to the City unless the revisions are necessary because of the CMAR’s inaccuracies or incompletions in preparing the GMP. Design Development • Refine Sustainability goals and targets • Continue design refinement • Review interior design and refine concepts and materials • Develop drawings and outline specifications documenting design • Confirm and develop all building systems and coordinate integration into design • Prepare pricing packages at 100% complete DD, for purposes of pricing by CMAR • Coordinate with city planning and zoning for plan reviews at 30%, 60% and 90% complete DD • Provide preliminary specifications, layouts, procurement, lead times, installation for FF&E • Include additive and deductive alternates in DD package to manage the budget Construction Document Key Tasks & Deliverables: • Prepare well-coordinated, complete drawings detailing all requirements of the project. • Detailed construction drawings to accurately depict the Project • Submit Construction Drawings for review of cost, schedule, and potential value engineering items. Revise documents as necessary. • Construction documents should serve as the basis for bidding and construction by the general contractor. • Prepare bid packages and coordinate with the CMAR to develop a strategy that facilitates the completion of those packages. Bidding Key Tasks & Deliverables: • Participate in key contractor interviews. • Develop bid packages, including invitation to bid, instructions to bidders, and other forms and supplements needed to convey requirements. • Attend and lead pre-bid meetings. • Respond to RFIs and coordinate responses and Addendums as needed. Page 239 of 1086 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA20 OPN ARCHITECTS + CITY OF EDINA 19 FF&E (following the completion of CDs) As a multi-disciplinary firm with interior designers on staff, OPN offers truly integrated design services. Our trained and licensed interior designers bring a specific expertise in interior finishes, materials, and furnishings to your project. Throughout design, they are engaged in the process. Alongside architects they guide clients through visioning and programming to ensure they understand your functional needs and aesthetic preferences. As part of design development, they will create material boards and presentations to help you hone in on preferred palettes. Our interior designers also assist in furniture selection and procurement by making suggestions that complement the interior architecture, verifying the layouts, quantities and styles before establishing a preliminary furniture estimate. During and after construction, we provide full design services to create furniture plans and specifications for all products and finishes to be issued to vendors or we can work with your selected furniture supplier to coordinate a seamless and integrated end result. Bidding (approx. 4 weeks) Following the approval of the construction documents and the construction estimate established, the team will assist the City of Edina and CMAR in preparation and assembly of the final bid packages to be posted on the City’s preferred internet bid site(s). We will prepare multiple bid packages to gain the most advantageous issuing of documents, maximize local subcontractors’ participation, and minimize construction duration. We understand and are experienced with planning for early bid packages for certain building components that are subject to long lead times and/or sub-trades that have a high potential for cost escalations. We will attend the pre-bid conference meeting and answer questions during bidding and contract negotiations and develop addendums to give bidders sufficient time to adjust bids accordingly. Following the contractor selection, we will coordinate with the City to support contract negotiations and establishing the mobilization dates. We are proud of our track record of accurate documents reflected in an average bid 3% below the estimate in the last 10 years. Construction Administration (approx. 26 weeks) During the construction phase, our team will maintain regular communication with the contractor and owner to ensure both the design intent and technical detailing of the project are executed. Our team will attend bi-weekly scheduled owner- architect-contractor meetings, we have assumed being on site for the duration of the construction every two weeks for a full day. We are proud of our firm’s change order average of less than 2.5% per project. We are committed to timely responses and collaborating with the entire team for the success of the project. Construction Administration Tasks: • Attend appropriate construction meetings. • Regular site observations of the contractor and subcontractors. • Review and approve submittals and shop drawings. • Review and analyze change orders and make recommendations to the city. • Maintain a log of Requests for Information (RFIs). • Prepare responses to questions and issue clarifications • Prepare and oversee completion of project punch list. • Advise and aid with certifications and commissioning. • Incorporate changes and revisions made during construction into the final record set of as-constructed drawings. • Communicate and coordinate the city, CMAR, and the selected contractor throughout the construction phase Work with a CM@R We are big proponents of alternate delivery methods like construction management because we are able to work in concert with our construction partners. As a unified team, we are able to seamlessly resolve issues while keeping the owner’s best interest in mind. While we as designers are visualizing the space, ensuring functional relationships, and exploring aesthetics, the construction manager is studying construction sequencing and how to maintain access to part of the building or site during construction. This unique perspective can prove valuable to the team as design decisions are made and cost control is monitored. Our collaborative and cooperative approach does not end with the design. Just as the construction manager will have a seat at the design table, as the architect, OPN will be present throughout construction. Work with Construction Manager $2 BILLION worth of projects 25-40% projects annually Page 240 of 1086 opnarchitects.com 323 N. Washington Ave. Ste 200, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Ellis Golf Course Clubhouse Page 241 of 1086 d PURCHASE REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.6 Prepared By: Shawn Anderson, Street Supervisor Item Type: Request for Purchase Department: Public Works Item Title: Request for Purchase: Sonetics Portable Wireless System Action Requested: Approve request for purchase for Sonetics Portable Wireless System with Sonetics Corporation for $24,594. Information/Background: This is safety feature to connect all of the operators onto one communication system so they can easily and safely communicate while on the job site. Quotes received: Sonetics Corporation: $24,594.86 Jet Line Sales and Service: $19,120.00 While another quote was provided that was cheaper, it did not provide the services and the same capabilities that the Sonetics system did. Sonetics Corporation utilizes a Wi-Fi system while Jet Line did not. Sonetics also offered better hearing protection and a better fit, so it was more beneficial to the wearer. It was also built more durably, which helps ensure it will last longer. For these reasons, Sonetics Corporation was chosen, even though it was not the lowest quote. Requisition Number: 12400265 Funding Source: ARPA Funds Vendor: Sonetics Corporation Equipment Status: New Cost: $24,594.86 Resources/Financial Impacts: • Budget – We are using available ARPA funds • Implementation – Public Works Streets Public Service Workers will be using these in the field. • Operation – Public Works Streets Department will be maintaining. Relationship to City Policies: Page 242 of 1086 Livable City This equipment will assist the operators while they plow the streets and safe streets are paramount to a livable city. Budget Pillar: Reliable Service This will improve efficiency and improve the level of service provided to the City and allow the operators to perform at a higher capacity. Values Impact:Use text snippets to include Values in the item report. Stewardship Providing quality service to residents through better communication. Supporting Documentation: None Page 243 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.7 Prepared By: Chad Millner, Engineering Director Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Engineering Item Title: Encroachment Agreement with 4113 Kipling Avenue Action Requested: Approve Encroachment Agreement with 4113 Kipling Avenue for a concrete pad and deck. Information/Background: The property owner has requested an encroachment agreement on a drainage and utility easement. The easement bisects the parcel, making any improvements nearly impossible to complete. The owner is responsible for all maintenance and removal of the concrete pad and deck if needed to access the sanitary sewer pipe. Staff supports this encroachment agreement. Resources/Financial Impacts: None. Relationship to City Policies: None. Supporting Documentation: 1. Encroachment Agreement 2. 4113 Kipling Ave Utility Page 244 of 1086 1 233293v1 (reserved for recording information) ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this _______ day of _____________, 2024, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and KELSEY BAKKEN LOUK and CHRISTOPHER LOUK, spouses married to each other, as joint tenants ("Owners"). 1. BACKGROUND. Owners are the fee owners of certain property located in the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota legally described as follows: Parcel ID No. 07-028-24-13-0131 Lot 2, Block 1, William Scotts Addition Peterson Replat, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof. (Torrens Property, Cert. 1571096)) having a street address of 4113 Kipling Avenue, Edina, MN 55416 ("Subject Property"). The City owns easements for drainage and utility purposes over portions of the subject property (“Easement Areas”). Owners desire to install and extend a deck overhang with steps (collectively the “Improvements”) on the Subject Property that encroach on the City’s Easement Areas as depicted on the attached Exhibit “A” Page 245 of 1086 2 233293v1 2. ENCROACHMENT AUTHORIZATION. The City hereby approves the encroachment of the Improvements in its Easement Areas on the Subject Property subject to the conditions set forth in this Agreement: • Owner of the Subject Property shall own and maintain the Improvements located within the City’s Easement Areas. • The City and its permittees, including but not limited to, gas, electric, cable, fiber optic utilities, or any other entity eligible for a right-of-way permit from the City to work within the City’s Easement Areas, shall have no responsibility to maintain or repair the Improvements located within the City’s Easement Areas including snow removal. • The Improvements located on the Subject Property must not impact or increase water drainage on the abutting properties or cause any adverse drainage patterns or erosion to the abutting properties. • The Owner shall construct and maintain the Improvements consistent with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. • The City shall continue to have access to the Improvements for drainage and utility maintenance operations. 3. MAINTENANCE. Owners shall be responsible for all costs relating to construction, reconstruction, maintenance, and repair of such Improvements. This maintenance agreement is a personal obligation of the Owners and shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the Owners. 4. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNITY. In consideration of being allowed to encroach in the City's Easement Areas, Owners, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, hereby agree to indemnify and hold the City harmless from all costs and expenses, claims and liability, including attorney's fees, relating to or arising out of this grant to Owners of permission to encroach in the City's Easement Areas for the access, use, maintenance, and operation, of the Improvements. 5. TERMINATION. If the City determines that the proposed Improvements interfere with the access, use, maintenance or repair of the City’s Easement Areas, Owners upon request by the City shall remove and replace the interference at their sole expense. If Owners fail to remove Page 246 of 1086 3 233293v1 the interference in the timeframe required by the City, the City may remove the Improvements and shall have no obligation for damages to, or repair or replacement of the Improvements removed by the City. Further, Owners consent to the City levying an assessment against the Subject Property for the City’s costs. The City may unilaterally terminate this Agreement if the Improvements interfere with any maintenance or improvements within the City’s Easement Areas as determined by the City. 6. RECORDING. This Agreement shall be recorded against the title to the Subject Property and shall be binding upon the Owners, their heirs, successors, executors, administrators and assigns in interest. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank. Signature pages follow.] Page 247 of 1086 4 233293v1 CITY OF EDINA By ___________________________________ (SEAL) James Hovland, Mayor And __________________________________ Scott Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of __________________, 2024, by James Hovland and by Scott Neal, respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. ____________________________________ Notary Public Page 248 of 1086 5 233293v1 PROPERTY OWNERS: Kelsey Bakken Louk Christopher Louk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 2024, by Kelsey Bakken Louk, spouse to Christopher Louk. ____________________________________ Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 2024, by Christopher Louk, spouse to Kelsey Bakken Louk. ____________________________________ Notary Public DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association Grand Oak Office Center I 806 Blue Gentian Road, #290 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (651) 452-5000 DSK/smt Page 249 of 1086 6 233293v1 EXHIBIT “A” Page 1 TO ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Encroachment Agreement Area A strip of land 10 feet in width, the centerline of said strip is described below: Commencing at the southeast corner of Lot 2, Block 1, WILLIAM SCOTTS ADDITION PETERSON REPLAT, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof. Thence; west along the south line of said lot on an assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 40 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 66.44 feet, thence; along the centerline of the drainage and utility easement per said plat, North 01 degrees 34 minutes 28 seconds East, a distance of 15.40 feet to the point of beginning of said centerline, thence; continuing on said centerline on a bearing of North 01 degrees 34 minutes 28 seconds East a distance of 37.40 feet and there terminating. Page 250 of 1086 7 233293v1 EXHIBIT “A” Page 2 TO ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT Page 251 of 1086 © WSB & Associates 2013 Sewer Blockages Active - Located Active - Uknown Other Cleanout Grease Interceptor Fitting Coupling Tee Lift Station Pump Station Meter Station Underground Storage Tank Manhole Drop Manhole Standard Manhole Summit Manhole Abandoned Manhole Gate Gravity Main SubType, LifeCycleStatus Collector, Active Collector, Abandoned Lateral Line Commercial Domestic Pressurized Main SubType, LifeCycleStatus Force, Abandoned Force, Active Piling Protective Tunnel Septic Tank Properties Parcels December 3, 2024 Map Powered By DataFi / 1 in = 8 ft Page 252 of 1086 d PURCHASE REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.8 Prepared By: Zuleyka Marquez, PE, Project Manager Item Type: Request for Purchase Department: Engineering Item Title: Request for Purchase: Electric Vehicle Chargers for Fire Station 2 Action Requested: Approve request for purchase of electric vehicle chargers for the new Fire Station 2 from Carbon Day EV Charging for $38,832. Information/Background: This purchase is for electric vehicle chargers to serve visitors, staff, and City fleet vehicles at the new Fire Station 2. Requisition Number: 12400267 Funding Source: General obligation bonds Vendor: Carbon Day EV Charging Equipment Status: New Cost: $38,832.00 Resources/Financial Impacts: Funding by CIP project FIR21008, New Fire Station 2. These EV chargers were included in the Fire Station 2 budget. Carbon Day EV Charging will coordinate delivery and installation with the construction manager. The Facilities Division will maintain these chargers. Relationship to City Policies: Supports Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 5 Transportation. Budget Pillar: Livable City Values Impact: Sustainability Invests in infrastructure to support the continued growth in low- to zero-emission technology and support regional and statewide efforts to adopt electric vehicles. . Page 253 of 1086 Supporting Documentation: 1. Carbon Day Agreement Page 254 of 1086 QUOTE Zuleyka Marquez NA013904 City of Edina 7450 Mertro Blvd Edina, MN 55439 952-826-0322 bobs@carbonday.com CP6021 (Dual Bollard 80 Amp, 18' Self-Retracting Cables COMMERCIAL) REFERENCE: Firehouse CTI QTY Price Per Station Total Price List $11,100 3 $7,215 $21,645 Per Plug 6 $1,640 $9,840 3 $1,700 $5,100 3 $125 $375 3 $349 $1,047 3 $275 $825 $38,832.00 Signature Date Ship to: CP6000-ASSURE-5 CP6000-CMT-NA Bollard Concrete Mounting Kit Reference Page 2 CPSUPPORT-ACTIVE Initial Activation and Configuration Shipping Shipping Amount Due Total cost before installation 5 Year Assure December 4, 2024 With Power Share Jumper And 5 Year Labor and Parts Warranty Model Number Description ChargePoint 80 Amp Dual Bollard with 18' Cable Reference Page 2 CP6021B-80A-L5.5 Locking Holster and Card Reader Reference Page 2 CPCLD-COMMERCIAL-5 5 Years Commercial Cloud Plan Page 255 of 1086 Initial Station Activation and Configuration Service includes activation of cloud services and configuration of radio groups, connections, access control, visibility control, pricing, reports and alerts. One time initial service per station $349 Commercial Cloud Plan available in prepay options: Annual fee includes: Commercial Cloud Plan, 24-7-365 Customer Service for Drivers via 800 number, Reporting, Software Updates, Station Manager Account Access, Data Collection and Credit Card Capability Pricing, Automatic Funds Collection, Power Management and Videos. 1 year $365 2 years $715 ($357.50 per year) per plug 3 years $1,040 ($346.66 per year) per plug 4 years $1,360 ($340 per year) per plug 5 years $1,640 ($328 per year) per plug Optional Programs: Assure Warranty optional extended Labor and Parts Warranty: 1 year $430 2 years $800 ($400 per year) 3 years $1,1140 ($380 per year) 4 years $1,440 ($360 per year) 5 years $1,700 ($340 per year) ** Other Standard Terms and Conditions 20% restocking fee for any product returned to ChargePoint Terms: 50% due upon placement of order and balance due 30 days after shipment of product. Issue payment to CD LLC. ChargePoint 2 year part warranty will be between purchaser and ChargePoint. Cloud and Assure plans start upon station activation or 90 day's after ship date, whichever is first. Prices are confidential and expire:January 3, 2025 Bob Spatz - 518-505-0508 - bobs@carbondayevcharging.com - 163 S. Wheeling Rd. - Wheeling, IL 60090 Visit Our Website: https://carbondayevcharging.com/ Page 256 of 1086 d PURCHASE REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.9 Prepared By: Zuleyka Marquez, PE, Project Manager Item Type: Request for Purchase Department: Engineering Item Title: Request for Purchase: Furniture for Fire Station 2 Action Requested: Approve request for purchase of furniture for new Fire Station 2 from Fluid Interiors for $267,262. Information/Background: This package includes furniture for open and private office spaces, conference rooms, an employee breakroom, and firefighter/paramedic dorms, kitchen, and dayroom. Requisition Number: 12400262 Funding Source: General obligation bonds Vendor: Fluid Interiors Equipment Status: New Cost: $267,262.42 Resources/Financial Impacts: Funding by CIP project FIR21008, New Fire Station 2. This package was included in the Fire Station 2 budget. Fluid Interiors will coordinate delivery and installation with the construction manager. The Fire Department will maintain the furniture. Relationship to City Policies: Supports Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 9 Community Services and Facilities. Budget Pillar: Reliable Service Values Impact: Stewardship The guiding principles for this purchase are quality materials that will endure heavy-duty usage while balancing the budget to increase long- term value and protect the initial capital investment. report. Page 257 of 1086 Supporting Documentation: 1. Contract 2. Contract General Conditions Page 258 of 1086 Page 259 of 1086 Page 260 of 1086 Page 261 of 1086 Page 262 of 1086 Page 263 of 1086 Page 264 of 1086 Page 265 of 1086 Page 266 of 1086 Page 267 of 1086 Page 268 of 1086 Page 269 of 1086 Page 270 of 1086 Page 271 of 1086 Page 272 of 1086 Page 273 of 1086 Page 274 of 1086 Page 275 of 1086 Page 276 of 1086 Page 277 of 1086 Page 278 of 1086 Document A201® – 2017 General Conditions of the Contract for Construction Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 1 ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS: The author of this document has added information needed for its completion. The author may also have revised the text of the original AIA standard form. An Additions and Deletions Report that notes added information as well as revisions to the standard form text is available from the author and should be reviewed. A vertical line in the left margin of this document indicates where the author has added necessary information and where the author has added to or deleted from the original AIA text. This document has important legal consequences. Consultation with an attorney is encouraged with respect to its completion or modification. For guidance in modifying this document to include supplementary conditions, see AIA Document A503™, Guide for Supplementary Conditions. for the following PROJECT: (Name and location or address) Edina Fire Station 2 4401 76th St W, Edina MN 55435 THE OWNER: (Name, legal status and address) City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 THE ARCHITECT: (Name, legal status and address) Boarman Kroos Vogel Group, Inc. 222 North Second Street, Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 TABLE OF ARTICLES 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS 2 OWNER 3 CONTRACTOR 4 ARCHITECT 5 SUBCONTRACTORS 6 CONSTRUCTION BY OWNER OR BY SEPARATE CONTRACTORS 7 CHANGES IN THE WORK 8 TIME 9 PAYMENTS AND COMPLETION 10 PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS 12 UNCOVERING AND CORRECTION OF WORK 13 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Page 279 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 2 14 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE CONTRACT 15 CLAIMS AND DISPUTES Page 280 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 3 INDEX (Topics and numbers in bold are Section headings.) Acceptance of Nonconforming Work 9.6.6, 9.9.3, 12.3 Acceptance of Work 9.6.6, 9.8.2, 9.9.3, 9.10.1, 9.10.3, 12.3 Access to Work 3.16, 6.2.1, 12.1 Accident Prevention 10 Acts and Omissions 3.2, 3.3.2, 3.12.8, 3.18, 4.2.3, 8.3.1, 9.5.1, 10.2.5, 10.2.8, 13.3.2, 14.1, 15.1.2, 15.2 Addenda 1.1.1 Additional Costs, Claims for 3.7.4, 3.7.5, 10.3.2, 15.1.5 Additional Inspections and Testing 9.4.2, 9.8.3, 12.2.1, 13.4 Additional Time, Claims for 3.2.4, 3.7.4, 3.7.5, 3.10.2, 8.3.2, 15.1.6 Administration of the Contract 3.1.3, 4.2, 9.4, 9.5 Advertisement or Invitation to Bid 1.1.1 Aesthetic Effect 4.2.13 Allowances 3.8 Applications for Payment 4.2.5, 7.3.9, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5.1, 9.5.4, 9.6.3, 9.7, 9.10 Approvals 2.1.1, 2.3.1, 2.5, 3.1.3, 3.10.2, 3.12.8, 3.12.9, 3.12.10.1, 4.2.7, 9.3.2, 13.4.1 Arbitration 8.3.1, 15.3.2, 15.4 ARCHITECT 4 Architect, Definition of 4.1.1 Architect, Extent of Authority 2.5, 3.12.7, 4.1.2, 4.2, 5.2, 6.3, 7.1.2, 7.3.4, 7.4, 9.2, 9.3.1, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6.3, 9.8, 9.10.1, 9.10.3, 12.1, 12.2.1, 13.4.1, 13.4.2, 14.2.2, 14.2.4, 15.1.4, 15.2.1 Architect, Limitations of Authority and Responsibility 2.1.1, 3.12.4, 3.12.8, 3.12.10, 4.1.2, 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.3, 4.2.6, 4.2.7, 4.2.10, 4.2.12, 4.2.13, 5.2.1, 7.4, 9.4.2, 9.5.4, 9.6.4, 15.1.4, 15.2 Architect’s Additional Services and Expenses 2.5, 12.2.1, 13.4.2, 13.4.3, 14.2.4 Architect’s Administration of the Contract 3.1.3, 3.7.4, 15.2, 9.4.1, 9.5 Architect’s Approvals 2.5, 3.1.3, 3.5, 3.10.2, 4.2.7 Architect’s Authority to Reject Work 3.5, 4.2.6, 12.1.2, 12.2.1 Architect’s Copyright 1.1.7, 1.5 Architect’s Decisions 3.7.4, 4.2.6, 4.2.7, 4.2.11, 4.2.12, 4.2.13, 4.2.14, 6.3, 7.3.4, 7.3.9, 8.1.3, 8.3.1, 9.2, 9.4.1, 9.5, 9.8.4, 9.9.1, 13.4.2, 15.2 Architect’s Inspections 3.7.4, 4.2.2, 4.2.9, 9.4.2, 9.8.3, 9.9.2, 9.10.1, 13.4 Architect’s Instructions 3.2.4, 3.3.1, 4.2.6, 4.2.7, 13.4.2 Architect’s Interpretations 4.2.11, 4.2.12 Architect’s Project Representative 4.2.10 Architect’s Relationship with Contractor 1.1.2, 1.5, 2.3.3, 3.1.3, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.3.1, 3.4.2, 3.5, 3.7.4, 3.7.5, 3.9.2, 3.9.3, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.16, 3.18, 4.1.2, 4.2, 5.2, 6.2.2, 7, 8.3.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 10.2.6, 10.3, 11.3, 12, 13.3.2, 13.4, 15.2 Architect’s Relationship with Subcontractors 1.1.2, 4.2.3, 4.2.4, 4.2.6, 9.6.3, 9.6.4, 11.3 Architect’s Representations 9.4.2, 9.5.1, 9.10.1 Architect’s Site Visits 3.7.4, 4.2.2, 4.2.9, 9.4.2, 9.5.1, 9.9.2, 9.10.1, 13.4 Asbestos 10.3.1 Attorneys’ Fees 3.18.1, 9.6.8, 9.10.2, 10.3.3 Award of Separate Contracts 6.1.1, 6.1.2 Award of Subcontracts and Other Contracts for Portions of the Work 5.2 Basic Definitions 1.1 Bidding Requirements 1.1.1 Binding Dispute Resolution 8.3.1, 9.7, 11.5, 13.1, 15.1.2, 15.1.3, 15.2.1, 15.2.5, 15.2.6.1, 15.3.1, 15.3.2, 15.3.3, 15.4.1 Bonds, Lien 7.3.4.4, 9.6.8, 9.10.2, 9.10.3 Bonds, Performance, and Payment 7.3.4.4, 9.6.7, 9.10.3, 11.1.2, 11.1.3, 11.5 Building Information Models Use and Reliance 1.8 Building Permit 3.7.1 Capitalization 1.3 Certificate of Substantial Completion 9.8.3, 9.8.4, 9.8.5 Page 281 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 4 Certificates for Payment 4.2.1, 4.2.5, 4.2.9, 9.3.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6.1, 9.6.6, 9.7, 9.10.1, 9.10.3, 14.1.1.3, 14.2.4, 15.1.4 Certificates of Inspection, Testing or Approval 13.4.4 Certificates of Insurance 9.10.2 Change Orders 1.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.7.4, 3.8.2.3, 3.11, 3.12.8, 4.2.8, 5.2.3, 7.1.2, 7.1.3, 7.2, 7.3.2, 7.3.7, 7.3.9, 7.3.10, 8.3.1, 9.3.1.1, 9.10.3, 10.3.2, 11.2, 11.5, 12.1.2 Change Orders, Definition of 7.2.1 CHANGES IN THE WORK 2.2.2, 3.11, 4.2.8, 7, 7.2.1, 7.3.1, 7.4, 8.3.1, 9.3.1.1, 11.5 Claims, Definition of 15.1.1 Claims, Notice of 1.6.2, 15.1.3 CLAIMS AND DISPUTES 3.2.4, 6.1.1, 6.3, 7.3.9, 9.3.3, 9.10.4, 10.3.3, 15, 15.4 Claims and Timely Assertion of Claims 15.4.1 Claims for Additional Cost 3.2.4, 3.3.1, 3.7.4, 7.3.9, 9.5.2, 10.2.5, 10.3.2, 15.1.5 Claims for Additional Time 3.2.4, 3.3.1, 3.7.4, 6.1.1, 8.3.2, 9.5.2, 10.3.2, 15.1.6 Concealed or Unknown Conditions, Claims for 3.7.4 Claims for Damages 3.2.4, 3.18, 8.3.3, 9.5.1, 9.6.7, 10.2.5, 10.3.3, 11.3, 11.3.2, 14.2.4, 15.1.7 Claims Subject to Arbitration 15.4.1 Cleaning Up 3.15, 6.3 Commencement of the Work, Conditions Relating to 2.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.4.1, 3.7.1, 3.10.1, 3.12.6, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 6.2.2, 8.1.2, 8.2.2, 8.3.1, 11.1, 11.2, 15.1.5 Commencement of the Work, Definition of 8.1.2 Communications 3.9.1, 4.2.4 Completion, Conditions Relating to 3.4.1, 3.11, 3.15, 4.2.2, 4.2.9, 8.2, 9.4.2, 9.8, 9.9.1, 9.10, 12.2, 14.1.2, 15.1.2 COMPLETION, PAYMENTS AND 9 Completion, Substantial 3.10.1, 4.2.9, 8.1.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.3, 9.4.2, 9.8, 9.9.1, 9.10.3, 12.2, 15.1.2 Compliance with Laws 2.3.2, 3.2.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.12.10, 3.13, 9.6.4, 10.2.2, 13.1, 13.3, 13.4.1, 13.4.2, 13.5, 14.1.1, 14.2.1.3, 15.2.8, 15.4.2, 15.4.3 Concealed or Unknown Conditions 3.7.4, 4.2.8, 8.3.1, 10.3 Conditions of the Contract 1.1.1, 6.1.1, 6.1.4 Consent, Written 3.4.2, 3.14.2, 4.1.2, 9.8.5, 9.9.1, 9.10.2, 9.10.3, 13.2, 15.4.4.2 Consolidation or Joinder 15.4.4 CONSTRUCTION BY OWNER OR BY SEPARATE CONTRACTORS 1.1.4, 6 Construction Change Directive, Definition of 7.3.1 Construction Change Directives 1.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.11, 3.12.8, 4.2.8, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.1.3, 7.3, 9.3.1.1 Construction Schedules, Contractor’s 3.10, 3.11, 3.12.1, 3.12.2, 6.1.3, 15.1.6.2 Contingent Assignment of Subcontracts 5.4, 14.2.2.2 Continuing Contract Performance 15.1.4 Contract, Definition of 1.1.2 CONTRACT, TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE 5.4.1.1, 5.4.2, 11.5, 14 Contract Administration 3.1.3, 4, 9.4, 9.5 Contract Award and Execution, Conditions Relating to 3.7.1, 3.10, 5.2, 6.1 Contract Documents, Copies Furnished and Use of 1.5.2, 2.3.6, 5.3 Contract Documents, Definition of 1.1.1 Contract Sum 2.2.2, 2.2.4, 3.7.4, 3.7.5, 3.8, 3.10.2, 5.2.3, 7.3, 7.4, 9.1, 9.2, 9.4.2, 9.5.1.4, 9.6.7, 9.7, 10.3.2, 11.5, 12.1.2, 12.3, 14.2.4, 14.3.2, 15.1.4.2, 15.1.5, 15.2.5 Contract Sum, Definition of 9.1 Contract Time 1.1.4, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 3.7.4, 3.7.5, 3.10.2, 5.2.3, 6.1.5, 7.2.1.3, 7.3.1, 7.3.5, 7.3.6, 7, 7, 7.3.10, 7.4, 8.1.1, 8.2.1, 8.2.3, 8.3.1, 9.5.1, 9.7, 10.3.2, 12.1.1, 12.1.2, 14.3.2, 15.1.4.2, 15.1.6.1, 15.2.5 Contract Time, Definition of 8.1.1 CONTRACTOR 3 Contractor, Definition of 3.1, 6.1.2 Contractor’s Construction and Submittal Schedules 3.10, 3.12.1, 3.12.2, 4.2.3, 6.1.3, 15.1.6.2 Page 282 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 5 Contractor’s Employees 2.2.4, 3.3.2, 3.4.3, 3.8.1, 3.9, 3.18.2, 4.2.3, 4.2.6, 10.2, 10.3, 11.3, 14.1, 14.2.1.1 Contractor’s Liability Insurance 11.1 Contractor’s Relationship with Separate Contractors and Owner’s Forces 3.12.5, 3.14.2, 4.2.4, 6, 11.3, 12.2.4 Contractor’s Relationship with Subcontractors 1.2.2, 2.2.4, 3.3.2, 3.18.1, 3.18.2, 4.2.4, 5, 9.6.2, 9.6.7, 9.10.2, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4 Contractor’s Relationship with the Architect 1.1.2, 1.5, 2.3.3, 3.1.3, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.3.1, 3.4.2, 3.5.1, 3.7.4, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.16, 3.18, 4.2, 5.2, 6.2.2, 7, 8.3.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 10.2.6, 10.3, 11.3, 12, 13.4, 15.1.3, 15.2.1 Contractor’s Representations 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.5, 3.12.6, 6.2.2, 8.2.1, 9.3.3, 9.8.2 Contractor’s Responsibility for Those Performing the Work 3.3.2, 3.18, 5.3, 6.1.3, 6.2, 9.5.1, 10.2.8 Contractor’s Review of Contract Documents 3.2 Contractor’s Right to Stop the Work 2.2.2, 9.7 Contractor’s Right to Terminate the Contract 14.1 Contractor’s Submittals 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 4.2.7, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 9.2, 9.3, 9.8.2, 9.8.3, 9.9.1, 9.10.2, 9.10.3 Contractor’s Superintendent 3.9, 10.2.6 Contractor’s Supervision and Construction Procedures 1.2.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.12.10, 4.2.2, 4.2.7, 6.1.3, 6.2.4, 7.1.3, 7.3.4, 7.3.6, 8.2, 10, 12, 14, 15.1.4 Coordination and Correlation 1.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.10, 3.12.6, 6.1.3, 6.2.1 Copies Furnished of Drawings and Specifications 1.5, 2.3.6, 3.11 Copyrights 1.5, 3.17 Correction of Work 2.5, 3.7.3, 9.4.2, 9.8.2, 9.8.3, 9.9.1, 12.1.2, 12.2, 12.3, 15.1.3.1, 15.1.3.2, 15.2.1 Correlation and Intent of the Contract Documents 1.2 Cost, Definition of 7.3.4 Costs 2.5, 3.2.4, 3.7.3, 3.8.2, 3.15.2, 5.4.2, 6.1.1, 6.2.3, 7.3.3.3, 7.3.4, 7.3.8, 7.3.9, 9.10.2, 10.3.2, 10.3.6, 11.2, 12.1.2, 12.2.1, 12.2.4, 13.4, 14 Cutting and Patching 3.14, 6.2.5 Damage to Construction of Owner or Separate Contractors 3.14.2, 6.2.4, 10.2.1.2, 10.2.5, 10.4, 12.2.4 Damage to the Work 3.14.2, 9.9.1, 10.2.1.2, 10.2.5, 10.4, 12.2.4 Damages, Claims for 3.2.4, 3.18, 6.1.1, 8.3.3, 9.5.1, 9.6.7, 10.3.3, 11.3.2, 11.3, 14.2.4, 15.1.7 Damages for Delay 6.2.3, 8.3.3, 9.5.1.6, 9.7, 10.3.2, 14.3.2 Date of Commencement of the Work, Definition of 8.1.2 Date of Substantial Completion, Definition of 8.1.3 Day, Definition of 8.1.4 Decisions of the Architect 3.7.4, 4.2.6, 4.2.7, 4.2.11, 4.2.12, 4.2.13, 6.3, 7.3.4, 7.3.9, 8.1.3, 8.3.1, 9.2, 9.4, 9.5.1, 9.8.4, 9.9.1, 13.4.2, 14.2.2, 14.2.4, 15.1, 15.2 Decisions to Withhold Certification 9.4.1, 9.5, 9.7, 14.1.1.3 Defective or Nonconforming Work, Acceptance, Rejection and Correction of 2.5, 3.5, 4.2.6, 6.2.3, 9.5.1, 9.5.3, 9.6.6, 9.8.2, 9.9.3, 9.10.4, 12.2.1 Definitions 1.1, 2.1.1, 3.1.1, 3.5, 3.12.1, 3.12.2, 3.12.3, 4.1.1, 5.1, 6.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.3.1, 8.1, 9.1, 9.8.1, 15.1.1 Delays and Extensions of Time 3.2, 3.7.4, 5.2.3, 7.2.1, 7.3.1, 7.4, 8.3, 9.5.1, 9.7, 10.3.2, 10.4, 14.3.2, 15.1.6, 15.2.5 Digital Data Use and Transmission 1.7 Disputes 6.3, 7.3.9, 15.1, 15.2 Documents and Samples at the Site 3.11 Drawings, Definition of 1.1.5 Drawings and Specifications, Use and Ownership of 3.11 Effective Date of Insurance 8.2.2 Emergencies 10.4, 14.1.1.2, 15.1.5 Employees, Contractor’s 3.3.2, 3.4.3, 3.8.1, 3.9, 3.18.2, 4.2.3, 4.2.6, 10.2, 10.3.3, 11.3, 14.1, 14.2.1.1 Equipment, Labor, or Materials 1.1.3, 1.1.6, 3.4, 3.5, 3.8.2, 3.8.3, 3.12, 3.13, 3.15.1, 4.2.6, 4.2.7, 5.2.1, 6.2.1, 7.3.4, 9.3.2, 9.3.3, 9.5.1.3, 9.10.2, 10.2.1, 10.2.4, 14.2.1.1, 14.2.1.2 Execution and Progress of the Work 1.1.3, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 2.3.4, 2.3.6, 3.1, 3.3.1, 3.4.1, 3.7.1, 3.10.1, 3.12, 3.14, 4.2, 6.2.2, 7.1.3, 7.3.6, 8.2, 9.5.1, 9.9.1, 10.2, 10.3, 12.1, 12.2, 14.2, 14.3.1, 15.1.4 Page 283 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 6 Extensions of Time 3.2.4, 3.7.4, 5.2.3, 7.2.1, 7.3, 7.4, 9.5.1, 9.7, 10.3.2, 10.4, 14.3, 15.1.6, 15.2.5 Failure of Payment 9.5.1.3, 9.7, 9.10.2, 13.5, 14.1.1.3, 14.2.1.2 Faulty Work (See Defective or Nonconforming Work) Final Completion and Final Payment 4.2.1, 4.2.9, 9.8.2, 9.10, 12.3, 14.2.4, 14.4.3 Financial Arrangements, Owner’s 2.2.1, 13.2.2, 14.1.1.4 GENERAL PROVISIONS 1 Governing Law 13.1 Guarantees (See Warranty) Hazardous Materials and Substances 10.2.4, 10.3 Identification of Subcontractors and Suppliers 5.2.1 Indemnification 3.17, 3.18, 9.6.8, 9.10.2, 10.3.3, 11.3 Information and Services Required of the Owner 2.1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.2.2, 3.12.10.1, 6.1.3, 6.1.4, 6.2.5, 9.6.1, 9.9.2, 9.10.3, 10.3.3, 11.2, 13.4.1, 13.4.2, 14.1.1.4, 14.1.4, 15.1.4 Initial Decision 15.2 Initial Decision Maker, Definition of 1.1.8 Initial Decision Maker, Decisions 14.2.4, 15.1.4.2, 15.2.1, 15.2.2, 15.2.3, 15.2.4, 15.2.5 Initial Decision Maker, Extent of Authority 14.2.4, 15.1.4.2, 15.2.1, 15.2.2, 15.2.3, 15.2.4, 15.2.5 Injury or Damage to Person or Property 10.2.8, 10.4 Inspections 3.1.3, 3.3.3, 3.7.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.6, 4.2.9, 9.4.2, 9.8.3, 9.9.2, 9.10.1, 12.2.1, 13.4 Instructions to Bidders 1.1.1 Instructions to the Contractor 3.2.4, 3.3.1, 3.8.1, 5.2.1, 7, 8.2.2, 12, 13.4.2 Instruments of Service, Definition of 1.1.7 Insurance 6.1.1, 7.3.4, 8.2.2, 9.3.2, 9.8.4, 9.9.1, 9.10.2, 10.2.5, 11 Insurance, Notice of Cancellation or Expiration 11.1.4, 11.2.3 Insurance, Contractor’s Liability 11.1 Insurance, Effective Date of 8.2.2, 14.4.2 Insurance, Owner’s Liability 11.2 Insurance, Property 10.2.5, 11.2, 11.4, 11.5 Insurance, Stored Materials 9.3.2 INSURANCE AND BONDS 11 Insurance Companies, Consent to Partial Occupancy 9.9.1 Insured loss, Adjustment and Settlement of 11.5 Intent of the Contract Documents 1.2.1, 4.2.7, 4.2.12, 4.2.13 Interest 13.5 Interpretation 1.1.8, 1.2.3, 1.4, 4.1.1, 5.1, 6.1.2, 15.1.1 Interpretations, Written 4.2.11, 4.2.12 Judgment on Final Award 15.4.2 Labor and Materials, Equipment 1.1.3, 1.1.6, 3.4, 3.5, 3.8.2, 3.8.3, 3.12, 3.13, 3.15.1, 5.2.1, 6.2.1, 7.3.4, 9.3.2, 9.3.3, 9.5.1.3, 9.10.2, 10.2.1, 10.2.4, 14.2.1.1, 14.2.1.2 Labor Disputes 8.3.1 Laws and Regulations 1.5, 2.3.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.6, 3.7, 3.12.10, 3.13, 9.6.4, 9.9.1, 10.2.2, 13.1, 13.3.1, 13.4.2, 13.5, 14, 15.2.8, 15.4 Liens 2.1.2, 9.3.1, 9.3.3, 9.6.8, 9.10.2, 9.10.4, 15.2.8 Limitations, Statutes of 12.2.5, 15.1.2, 15.4.1.1 Limitations of Liability 3.2.2, 3.5, 3.12.10, 3.12.10.1, 3.17, 3.18.1, 4.2.6, 4.2.7, 6.2.2, 9.4.2, 9.6.4, 9.6.7, 9.6.8, 10.2.5, 10.3.3, 11.3, 12.2.5, 13.3.1 Limitations of Time 2.1.2, 2.2, 2.5, 3.2.2, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12.5, 3.15.1, 4.2.7, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4.1, 6.2.4, 7.3, 7.4, 8.2, 9.2, 9.3.1, 9.3.3, 9.4.1, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 12.2, 13.4, 14, 15, 15.1.2, 15.1.3, 15.1.5 Materials, Hazardous 10.2.4, 10.3 Materials, Labor, Equipment and 1.1.3, 1.1.6, 3.4.1, 3.5, 3.8.2, 3.8.3, 3.12, 3.13, 3.15.1, 5.2.1, 6.2.1, 7.3.4, 9.3.2, 9.3.3, 9.5.1.3, 9.10.2, 10.2.1.2, 10.2.4, 14.2.1.1, 14.2.1.2 Means, Methods, Techniques, Sequences and Procedures of Construction 3.3.1, 3.12.10, 4.2.2, 4.2.7, 9.4.2 Mechanic’s Lien 2.1.2, 9.3.1, 9.3.3, 9.6.8, 9.10.2, 9.10.4, 15.2.8 Mediation 8.3.1, 15.1.3.2, 15.2.1, 15.2.5, 15.2.6, 15.3, 15.4.1, 15.4.1.1 Minor Changes in the Work 1.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.12.8, 4.2.8, 7.1, 7.4 Page 284 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 7 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 13 Modifications, Definition of 1.1.1 Modifications to the Contract 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 2.5, 3.11, 4.1.2, 4.2.1, 5.2.3, 7, 8.3.1, 9.7, 10.3.2 Mutual Responsibility 6.2 Nonconforming Work, Acceptance of 9.6.6, 9.9.3, 12.3 Nonconforming Work, Rejection and Correction of 2.4, 2.5, 3.5, 4.2.6, 6.2.4, 9.5.1, 9.8.2, 9.9.3, 9.10.4, 12.2 Notice 1.6, 1.6.1, 1.6.2, 2.1.2, 2.2.2., 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.5, 3.2.4, 3.3.1, 3.7.4, 3.7.5, 3.9.2, 3.12.9, 3.12.10, 5.2.1, 7.4, 8.2.2 9.6.8, 9.7, 9.10.1, 10.2.8, 10.3.2, 11.5, 12.2.2.1, 13.4.1, 13.4.2, 14.1, 14.2.2, 14.4.2, 15.1.3, 15.1.5, 15.1.6, 15.4.1 Notice of Cancellation or Expiration of Insurance 11.1.4, 11.2.3 Notice of Claims 1.6.2, 2.1.2, 3.7.4, 9.6.8, 10.2.8, 15.1.3, 15.1.5, 15.1.6, 15.2.8, 15.3.2, 15.4.1 Notice of Testing and Inspections 13.4.1, 13.4.2 Observations, Contractor’s 3.2, 3.7.4 Occupancy 2.3.1, 9.6.6, 9.8 Orders, Written 1.1.1, 2.4, 3.9.2, 7, 8.2.2, 11.5, 12.1, 12.2.2.1, 13.4.2, 14.3.1 OWNER 2 Owner, Definition of 2.1.1 Owner, Evidence of Financial Arrangements 2.2, 13.2.2, 14.1.1.4 Owner, Information and Services Required of the 2.1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.2.2, 3.12.10, 6.1.3, 6.1.4, 6.2.5, 9.3.2, 9.6.1, 9.6.4, 9.9.2, 9.10.3, 10.3.3, 11.2, 13.4.1, 13.4.2, 14.1.1.4, 14.1.4, 15.1.4 Owner’s Authority 1.5, 2.1.1, 2.3.32.4, 2.5, 3.4.2, 3.8.1, 3.12.10, 3.14.2, 4.1.2, 4.2.4, 4.2.9, 5.2.1, 5.2.4, 5.4.1, 6.1, 6.3, 7.2.1, 7.3.1, 8.2.2, 8.3.1, 9.3.2, 9.5.1, 9.6.4, 9.9.1, 9.10.2, 10.3.2, 11.4, 11.5, 12.2.2, 12.3, 13.2.2, 14.3, 14.4, 15.2.7 Owner’s Insurance 11.2 Owner’s Relationship with Subcontractors 1.1.2, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 9.6.4, 9.10.2, 14.2.2 Owner’s Right to Carry Out the Work 2.5, 14.2.2 Owner’s Right to Clean Up 6.3 Owner’s Right to Perform Construction and to Award Separate Contracts 6.1 Owner’s Right to Stop the Work 2.4 Owner’s Right to Suspend the Work 14.3 Owner’s Right to Terminate the Contract 14.2, 14.4 Ownership and Use of Drawings, Specifications and Other Instruments of Service 1.1.1, 1.1.6, 1.1.7, 1.5, 2.3.6, 3.2.2, 3.11, 3.17, 4.2.12, 5.3 Partial Occupancy or Use 9.6.6, 9.9 Patching, Cutting and 3.14, 6.2.5 Patents 3.17 Payment, Applications for 4.2.5, 7.3.9, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6.3, 9.7, 9.8.5, 9.10.1, 14.2.3, 14.2.4, 14.4.3 Payment, Certificates for 4.2.5, 4.2.9, 9.3.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6.1, 9.6.6, 9.7, 9.10.1, 9.10.3, 14.1.1.3, 14.2.4 Payment, Failure of 9.5.1.3, 9.7, 9.10.2, 13.5, 14.1.1.3, 14.2.1.2 Payment, Final 4.2.1, 4.2.9, 9.10, 12.3, 14.2.4, 14.4.3 Payment Bond, Performance Bond and 7.3.4.4, 9.6.7, 9.10.3, 11.1.2 Payments, Progress 9.3, 9.6, 9.8.5, 9.10.3, 14.2.3, 15.1.4 PAYMENTS AND COMPLETION 9 Payments to Subcontractors 5.4.2, 9.5.1.3, 9.6.2, 9.6.3, 9.6.4, 9.6.7, 14.2.1.2 PCB 10.3.1 Performance Bond and Payment Bond 7.3.4.4, 9.6.7, 9.10.3, 11.1.2 Permits, Fees, Notices and Compliance with Laws 2.3.1, 3.7, 3.13, 7.3.4.4, 10.2.2 PERSONS AND PROPERTY, PROTECTION OF 10 Polychlorinated Biphenyl 10.3.1 Product Data, Definition of 3.12.2 Product Data and Samples, Shop Drawings 3.11, 3.12, 4.2.7 Progress and Completion 4.2.2, 8.2, 9.8, 9.9.1, 14.1.4, 15.1.4 Progress Payments 9.3, 9.6, 9.8.5, 9.10.3, 14.2.3, 15.1.4 Page 285 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 8 Project, Definition of 1.1.4 Project Representatives 4.2.10 Property Insurance 10.2.5, 11.2 Proposal Requirements 1.1.1 PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY 10 Regulations and Laws 1.5, 2.3.2, 3.2.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.12.10, 3.13, 9.6.4, 9.9.1, 10.2.2, 13.1, 13.3, 13.4.1, 13.4.2, 13.5, 14, 15.2.8, 15.4 Rejection of Work 4.2.6, 12.2.1 Releases and Waivers of Liens 9.3.1, 9.10.2 Representations 3.2.1, 3.5, 3.12.6, 8.2.1, 9.3.3, 9.4.2, 9.5.1, 9.10.1 Representatives 2.1.1, 3.1.1, 3.9, 4.1.1, 4.2.10, 13.2.1 Responsibility for Those Performing the Work 3.3.2, 3.18, 4.2.2, 4.2.3, 5.3, 6.1.3, 6.2, 6.3, 9.5.1, 10 Retainage 9.3.1, 9.6.2, 9.8.5, 9.9.1, 9.10.2, 9.10.3 Review of Contract Documents and Field Conditions by Contractor 3.2, 3.12.7, 6.1.3 Review of Contractor’s Submittals by Owner and Architect 3.10.1, 3.10.2, 3.11, 3.12, 4.2, 5.2, 6.1.3, 9.2, 9.8.2 Review of Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples by Contractor 3.12 Rights and Remedies 1.1.2, 2.4, 2.5, 3.5, 3.7.4, 3.15.2, 4.2.6, 5.3, 5.4, 6.1, 6.3, 7.3.1, 8.3, 9.5.1, 9.7, 10.2.5, 10.3, 12.2.1, 12.2.2, 12.2.4, 13.3, 14, 15.4 Royalties, Patents and Copyrights 3.17 Rules and Notices for Arbitration 15.4.1 Safety of Persons and Property 10.2, 10.4 Safety Precautions and Programs 3.3.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.7, 5.3, 10.1, 10.2, 10.4 Samples, Definition of 3.12.3 Samples, Shop Drawings, Product Data and 3.11, 3.12, 4.2.7 Samples at the Site, Documents and 3.11 Schedule of Values 9.2, 9.3.1 Schedules, Construction 3.10, 3.12.1, 3.12.2, 6.1.3, 15.1.6.2 Separate Contracts and Contractors 1.1.4, 3.12.5, 3.14.2, 4.2.4, 4.2.7, 6, 8.3.1, 12.1.2 Separate Contractors, Definition of 6.1.1 Shop Drawings, Definition of 3.12.1 Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples 3.11, 3.12, 4.2.7 Site, Use of 3.13, 6.1.1, 6.2.1 Site Inspections 3.2.2, 3.3.3, 3.7.1, 3.7.4, 4.2, 9.9.2, 9.4.2, 9.10.1, 13.4 Site Visits, Architect’s 3.7.4, 4.2.2, 4.2.9, 9.4.2, 9.5.1, 9.9.2, 9.10.1, 13.4 Special Inspections and Testing 4.2.6, 12.2.1, 13.4 Specifications, Definition of 1.1.6 Specifications 1.1.1, 1.1.6, 1.2.2, 1.5, 3.12.10, 3.17, 4.2.14 Statute of Limitations 15.1.2, 15.4.1.1 Stopping the Work 2.2.2, 2.4, 9.7, 10.3, 14.1 Stored Materials 6.2.1, 9.3.2, 10.2.1.2, 10.2.4 Subcontractor, Definition of 5.1.1 SUBCONTRACTORS 5 Subcontractors, Work by 1.2.2, 3.3.2, 3.12.1, 3.18, 4.2.3, 5.2.3, 5.3, 5.4, 9.3.1.2, 9.6.7 Subcontractual Relations 5.3, 5.4, 9.3.1.2, 9.6, 9.10, 10.2.1, 14.1, 14.2.1 Submittals 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 4.2.7, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.3.4, 9.2, 9.3, 9.8, 9.9.1, 9.10.2, 9.10.3 Submittal Schedule 3.10.2, 3.12.5, 4.2.7 Subrogation, Waivers of 6.1.1, 11.3 Substances, Hazardous 10.3 Substantial Completion 4.2.9, 8.1.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.3, 9.4.2, 9.8, 9.9.1, 9.10.3, 12.2, 15.1.2 Substantial Completion, Definition of 9.8.1 Substitution of Subcontractors 5.2.3, 5.2.4 Substitution of Architect 2.3.3 Substitutions of Materials 3.4.2, 3.5, 7.3.8 Sub-subcontractor, Definition of 5.1.2 Page 286 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 9 Subsurface Conditions 3.7.4 Successors and Assigns 13.2 Superintendent 3.9, 10.2.6 Supervision and Construction Procedures 1.2.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.12.10, 4.2.2, 4.2.7, 6.1.3, 6.2.4, 7.1.3, 7.3.4, 8.2, 8.3.1, 9.4.2, 10, 12, 14, 15.1.4 Suppliers 1.5, 3.12.1, 4.2.4, 4.2.6, 5.2.1, 9.3, 9.4.2, 9.5.4, 9.6, 9.10.5, 14.2.1 Surety 5.4.1.2, 9.6.8, 9.8.5, 9.10.2, 9.10.3, 11.1.2, 14.2.2, 15.2.7 Surety, Consent of 9.8.5, 9.10.2, 9.10.3 Surveys 1.1.7, 2.3.4 Suspension by the Owner for Convenience 14.3 Suspension of the Work 3.7.5, 5.4.2, 14.3 Suspension or Termination of the Contract 5.4.1.1, 14 Taxes 3.6, 3.8.2.1, 7.3.4.4 Termination by the Contractor 14.1, 15.1.7 Termination by the Owner for Cause 5.4.1.1, 14.2, 15.1.7 Termination by the Owner for Convenience 14.4 Termination of the Architect 2.3.3 Termination of the Contractor Employment 14.2.2 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE CONTRACT 14 Tests and Inspections 3.1.3, 3.3.3, 3.7.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.6, 4.2.9, 9.4.2, 9.8.3, 9.9.2, 9.10.1, 10.3.2, 12.2.1, 13.4 TIME 8 Time, Delays and Extensions of 3.2.4, 3.7.4, 5.2.3, 7.2.1, 7.3.1, 7.4, 8.3, 9.5.1, 9.7, 10.3.2, 10.4, 14.3.2, 15.1.6, 15.2.5 Time Limits 2.1.2, 2.2, 2.5, 3.2.2, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12.5, 3.15.1, 4.2, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 6.2.4, 7.3, 7.4, 8.2, 9.2, 9.3.1, 9.3.3, 9.4.1, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 12.2, 13.4, 14, 15.1.2, 15.1.3, 15.4 Time Limits on Claims 3.7.4, 10.2.8, 15.1.2, 15.1.3 Title to Work 9.3.2, 9.3.3 UNCOVERING AND CORRECTION OF WORK 12 Uncovering of Work 12.1 Unforeseen Conditions, Concealed or Unknown 3.7.4, 8.3.1, 10.3 Unit Prices 7.3.3.2, 9.1.2 Use of Documents 1.1.1, 1.5, 2.3.6, 3.12.6, 5.3 Use of Site 3.13, 6.1.1, 6.2.1 Values, Schedule of 9.2, 9.3.1 Waiver of Claims by the Architect 13.3.2 Waiver of Claims by the Contractor 9.10.5, 13.3.2, 15.1.7 Waiver of Claims by the Owner 9.9.3, 9.10.3, 9.10.4, 12.2.2.1, 13.3.2, 14.2.4, 15.1.7 Waiver of Consequential Damages 14.2.4, 15.1.7 Waiver of Liens 9.3, 9.10.2, 9.10.4 Waivers of Subrogation 6.1.1, 11.3 Warranty 3.5, 4.2.9, 9.3.3, 9.8.4, 9.9.1, 9.10.2, 9.10.4, 12.2.2, 15.1.2 Weather Delays 8.3, 15.1.6.2 Work, Definition of 1.1.3 Written Consent 1.5.2, 3.4.2, 3.7.4, 3.12.8, 3.14.2, 4.1.2, 9.3.2, 9.10.3, 13.2, 13.3.2, 15.4.4.2 Written Interpretations 4.2.11, 4.2.12 Written Orders 1.1.1, 2.4, 3.9, 7, 8.2.2, 12.1, 12.2, 13.4.2, 14.3.1 Page 287 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 10 ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS § 1.1 Basic Definitions § 1.1.1 The Contract Documents The Contract Documents are enumerated in the Agreement between the Owner and Contractor (hereinafter the Agreement) and consist of the Agreement, Conditions of the Contract (General, Supplementary and other Conditions), Drawings, Specifications, Addenda issued prior to execution of the Contract, other documents listed in the Agreement, and Modifications issued after execution of the Contract. A Modification is (1) a written amendment to the Contract signed by both parties, (2) a Change Order, (3) a Construction Change Directive, or (4) a written order for a minor change in the Work issued by the Architect. Unless specifically enumerated in the Agreement, the Contract Documents do not include the advertisement or invitation to bid, Instructions to Bidders, sample forms, other information furnished by the Owner in anticipation of receiving bids or proposals, the Contractor’s bid or proposal, or portions of Addenda relating to bidding or proposal requirements. § 1.1.2 The Contract The Contract Documents form the Contract for Construction. The Contract represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties hereto and supersedes prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. The Contract may be amended or modified only by a Modification. The Contract Documents shall not be construed to create a contractual relationship of any kind (1) between the Contractor and the Architect or the Architect’s consultants, (2) between the Owner and a Subcontractor or a Sub-subcontractor, (3) between the Owner and the Architect or the Architect’s consultants, or (4) between any persons or entities other than the Owner and the Contractor. The Architect shall, however, be entitled to performance and enforcement of obligations under the Contract intended to facilitate performance of the Architect’s duties. § 1.1.3 The Work The term "Work" means the construction and services required by the Contract Documents, whether completed or partially completed, and includes all other labor, materials, equipment, and services provided or to be provided by the Contractor to fulfill the Contractor’s obligations. The Work may constitute the whole or a part of the Project. § 1.1.4 The Project The Project is the total construction of which the Work performed under the Contract Documents may be the whole or a part and which may include construction by the Owner and by Separate Contractors. § 1.1.5 The Drawings The Drawings are the graphic and pictorial portions of the Contract Documents showing the design, location and dimensions of the Work, generally including plans, elevations, sections, details, schedules, and diagrams. § 1.1.6 The Specifications The Specifications are that portion of the Contract Documents consisting of the written requirements for materials, equipment, systems, standards and workmanship for the Work, and performance of related services. § 1.1.7 Instruments of Service Instruments of Service are representations, in any medium of expression now known or later developed, of the tangible and intangible creative work performed by the Architect and the Architect’s consultants under their respective professional services agreements. Instruments of Service may include, without limitation, studies, surveys, models, sketches, drawings, specifications, and other similar materials. § 1.1.8 Initial Decision Maker The Initial Decision Maker is the person identified in the Agreement to render initial decisions on Claims in accordance with Section 15.2. The Initial Decision Maker shall not show partiality to the Owner or Contractor and shall not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions rendered in good faith. § 1.2 Correlation and Intent of the Contract Documents § 1.2.1 The Contract Documents are to be read and interpreted as a whole. The intent of the Contract Documents is to include all items necessary for the proper execution and completion of the Work and to require Contractor to provide the highest quality and greatest quantity consistent with the Contract Documents. If there are inconsistencies within or among part of the Contract Documents or between the Contract Documents and applicable standards, codes or ordinances, the Contractor shall provide the better quality or greater quantity of Work or comply with the more Page 288 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 11 stringent requirements; either or all in accordance with the Architect’s interpretation. The terms and conditions of this subparagraph 1.2.1 shall not relieve the Contractor of any of its obligations as set forth in Article 3. .1 Before ordering any materials or doing any Work, the Contractor shall verify measurements at the Project site and shall be responsible for the correctness of such measurements. No extra charges or compensation will be allowed on account of differences between actual dimensions and the dimensions indicated on the Drawings. Any difference that may be found shall be submitted to the Architect for resolution before proceeding with the Work. .2 If a minor change in the Work is necessary due to actual field conditions, the Contractor shall submit detailed drawings of such departure to the Architect for approval by the Architect before making the change. The Owner shall not be required to make any adjustment to either the Contract Sum or Contract Time because of any failure by the Contractor to comply with the requirements of this Subparagraph 1.2.1. Actual or alleged conflicts or inconsistencies between the Drawings and Specifications or other Contract Documents shall be brought to the Architect’s and Architect’s attention in writing, prior to performing the affected Work. The Architect’s and Construction Manager’s directions, as communicated through the Architect, shall be followed by the Contractor. § 1.2.1.1 The invalidity of any provision of the Contract Documents shall not invalidate the Contract or its remaining provisions. If it is determined that any provision of the Contract Documents violates any law, or is otherwise invalid or unenforceable, then that provision shall be revised to the extent necessary to make that provision legal and enforceable. In such case the Contract Documents shall be construed, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to give effect to the parties’ intentions and purposes in executing the Contract. § 1.2.2 Organization of the Specifications into divisions, sections and articles, and arrangement of Drawings shall not control the Contractor in dividing the Work among Subcontractors or in establishing the extent of Work to be performed by any trade. § 1.2.3 Unless otherwise stated in the Contract Documents, words that have well-known technical or construction industry meanings are used in the Contract Documents in accordance with such recognized meanings. § 1.3 Capitalization Terms capitalized in these General Conditions include those that are (1) specifically defined, (2) the titles of numbered articles, or (3) the titles of other documents published by the American Institute of Architects. § 1.4 Interpretation In the interest of brevity the Contract Documents frequently omit modifying words such as "all" and "any" and articles such as "the" and "an," but the fact that a modifier or an article is absent from one statement and appears in another is not intended to affect the interpretation of either statement. § 1.5 Ownership and Use of Drawings, Specifications, and Other Instruments of Service § 1.5.1 The Architect and the Architect’s consultants shall be deemed the authors and owners of their respective Instruments of Service, including the Drawings and Specifications, and retain all common law, statutory, and other reserved rights in their Instruments of Service, including copyrights. The Contractor, Subcontractors, Sub-subcontractors, and suppliers shall not own or claim a copyright in the Instruments of Service. Submittal or distribution to meet official regulatory requirements or for other purposes in connection with the Project is not to be construed as publication in derogation of the Architect’s or Architect’s consultants’ reserved rights. § 1.5.2 The Contractor, Subcontractors, Sub-subcontractors, and suppliers are authorized to use and reproduce the Instruments of Service provided to them, subject to any protocols established pursuant to Sections 1.7 and 1.8, solely and exclusively for execution of the Work. All copies made under this authorization shall bear the copyright notice, if any, shown on the Instruments of Service. The Contractor, Subcontractors, Sub-subcontractors, and suppliers may not use the Instruments of Service on other projects or for additions to the Project outside the scope of the Work without the specific written consent of the Owner, Architect, and the Architect’s consultants. Page 289 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 12 § 1.6 Notice § 1.6.1 Except as otherwise provided in Section 1.6.2, where the Contract Documents require one party to notify or give notice to the other party, such notice shall be provided in writing to the designated representative of the party to whom the notice is addressed and shall be deemed to have been duly served if delivered in person, by mail, by courier, or by electronic transmission if a method for electronic transmission is set forth in the Agreement. § 1.6.2 Notice of Claims as provided in Section 15.1.3 shall be provided in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly served only if delivered to the designated representative of the party to whom the notice is addressed by certified or registered mail, or by courier providing proof of delivery. § 1.7 Digital Data Use and Transmission The parties shall agree upon protocols governing the transmission and use of Instruments of Service or any other information or documentation in digital form. The parties will use AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, to establish the protocols for the development, use, transmission, and exchange of digital data. § 1.8 Building Information Models Use and Reliance Any use of, or reliance on, all or a portion of a building information model without agreement to protocols governing the use of, and reliance on, the information contained in the model and without having those protocols set forth in AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, and the requisite AIA Document G202™–2013, Project Building Information Modeling Protocol Form, shall be at the using or relying party’s sole risk and without liability to the other party and its contractors or consultants, the authors of, or contributors to, the building information model, and each of their agents and employees. ARTICLE 2 OWNER § 2.1 General § 2.1.1 The Owner is the person or entity identified as such in the Agreement and is referred to throughout the Contract Documents as if singular in number. The Owner shall designate in writing a representative who shall have express authority to bind the Owner with respect to all matters requiring the Owner’s approval or authorization. Except as otherwise provided in Section 4.2.1, the Architect does not have such authority. The term "Owner" means the Owner or the Owner’s authorized representative. § 2.1.2 Work is to proceed as a no-lien Project in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota regarding public projects. Contractor shall provide to the Owner both a Labor and Material Payment Bond and a Performance Bond each in the amount of the Contract Price prior to the commencement of Work as required by Minnesota Statutes 574.26. The Contractor, for itself and for all who claim through the Contractor, acknowledges and agrees: (i) that because it is a public project, no lien shall attach to the real estate on which the Project is located or to any improvements no existing or to be constructed thereon in favor of the Contractor or any Subcontractor, mechanic, journeyman, laborer, material vendor, lessor of tools or equipment or any other party who may furnish work, materials, equipment, services, tools or machinery for the design or construction of improvements on the land. The Contractor shall also provide written notice of the no-lien status of this Project to all of its Subcontractors, material suppliers, equipment lessors and others that provide labor, material, equipment and/or services for the Project. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and Architect harmless from any suit, lien, damages, losses or expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees.. (Paragraphs deleted) § 2.3 Information and Services Required of the Owner § 2.3.1 Except for permits and fees that are the responsibility of the Contractor under the Contract Documents, including those required under Section 3.7.1, the Owner shall secure and pay for necessary approvals, easements, assessments and charges required for construction, use or occupancy of permanent structures or for permanent changes in existing facilities. § 2.3.2 The Owner shall retain an architect lawfully licensed to practice architecture, or an entity lawfully practicing architecture, in the jurisdiction where the Project is located. That person or entity is identified as the Architect in the Agreement and is referred to throughout the Contract Documents as if singular in number. Page 290 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 13 § 2.3.3 If the employment of the Architect terminates, the Owner shall employ a whose status under the Contract Documents shall be that of the Architect. § 2.3.4 The Owner shall furnish surveys describing physical characteristics, legal limitations and utility locations for the site of the Project, and a legal description of the site. The Contractor shall be entitled to rely on the accuracy of information furnished by the Owner but shall exercise proper precautions relating to the safe performance of the Work. § 2.3.5 The Owner shall furnish information or services required of the Owner by the Contract Documents with reasonable promptness. The Owner shall also furnish any other information or services under the Owner’s control and relevant to the Contractor’s performance of the Work with reasonable promptness after receiving the Contractor’s written request for such information or services. § 2.3.6 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, the Owner shall furnish to the Contractor one copy of the Contract Documents for purposes of making reproductions pursuant to Section 1.5.2. § 2.4 Owner’s Right to Stop the Work If the Contractor fails to correct Work that is not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents as required by Section 12.2 or repeatedly fails to carry out Work in accordance with the Contract Documents, the Owner may issue a written order to the Contractor to stop the Work, or any portion thereof, until the cause for such order has been eliminated; however, the right of the Owner to stop the Work shall not give rise to a duty on the part of the Owner to exercise this right for the benefit of the Contractor or any other person or entity, except to the extent required by Section 6.1.3. § 2.5 Owner’s Right to Carry Out the Work If the Contractor defaults or neglects to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents and fails within a ten-day period after receipt of notice from the Owner to commence and continue correction of such default or neglect with diligence and promptness, the Owner may, without prejudice to other remedies the Owner may have, correct such default or neglect. Such action by the Owner and amounts charged to the Contractor are both subject to prior approval of the Architect and the Architect may, pursuant to Section 9.5.1, withhold or nullify a Certificate for Payment in whole or in part, to the extent reasonably necessary to reimburse the Owner for the reasonable cost of correcting such deficiencies, including Owner’s expenses and compensation for the Architect’s additional services made necessary by such default, neglect, or failure. If current and future payments are not sufficient to cover such amounts, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the Owner. If the Contractor disagrees with the actions of the Owner or the Architect, or the amounts claimed as costs to the Owner, the Contractor may file a Claim pursuant to Article 15. ARTICLE 3 CONTRACTOR § 3.1 General § 3.1.1 The Contractor is the person or entity identified as such in the Agreement and is referred to throughout the Contract Documents as if singular in number. The Contractor shall be lawfully licensed, if required in the jurisdiction where the Project is located. The Contractor shall designate in writing a representative who shall have express authority to bind the Contractor with respect to all matters under this Contract. The term "Contractor" means the Contractor or the Contractor’s authorized representative. § 3.1.2 The Contractor shall perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. § 3.1.3 The Contractor shall not be relieved of its obligations to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents either by activities or duties of the Architect in the Architect’s administration of the Contract, or by tests, inspections or approvals required or performed by persons or entities other than the Contractor. § 3.2 Review of Contract Documents and Field Conditions by Contractor § 3.2.1 Execution of the Contract by the Contractor is a representation that the Contractor has visited the site, become generally familiar with local conditions under which the Work is to be performed, and correlated personal observations with requirements of the Contract Documents. Page 291 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 14 § 3.2.2 Because the Contract Documents are complementary, the Contractor shall, before starting each portion of the Work, carefully study and compare the various Contract Documents relative to that portion of the Work, as well as the information furnished by the Owner pursuant to Section 2.3.4, shall take field measurements of any existing conditions related to that portion of the Work, and shall observe any conditions at the site affecting it. These obligations are for the purpose of facilitating coordination and construction by the Contractor and are not for the purpose of discovering errors, omissions, or inconsistencies in the Contract Documents; however, the Contractor shall promptly report to the Architect any errors, inconsistencies or omissions discovered by or made known to the Contractor as a request for information in such form as the Architect may require. It is recognized that the Contractor’s review is made in the Contractor’s capacity as a contractor and not as a licensed design professional, unless otherwise specifically provided in the Contract Documents. § 3.2.3 The Contractor is not required to ascertain that the Contract Documents are in accordance with applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations, or lawful orders of public authorities, but the Contractor shall promptly report to the Architect any nonconformity discovered by or made known to the Contractor as a request for information in such form as the Architect may require. § 3.2.4 If the Contractor believes that additional cost or time is involved because of clarifications or instructions the Architect issues in response to the Contractor’s notices or requests for information pursuant to Sections 3.2.2 or 3.2.3, the Contractor shall submit Claims as provided in Article 15. If the Contractor fails to perform the obligations of Sections 3.2.2 or 3.2.3, the Contractor shall pay such costs and damages to the Owner, subject to Section 15.1.7, as would have been avoided if the Contractor had performed such obligations. If the Contractor performs those obligations, the Contractor shall not be liable to the Owner or Architect for damages resulting from errors, inconsistencies or omissions in the Contract Documents, for differences between field measurements or conditions and the Contract Documents, or for nonconformities of the Contract Documents to applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations, and lawful orders of public authorities. § 3.3 Supervision and Construction Procedures § 3.3.1 The Contractor shall supervise and direct the Work, using the Contractor’s best skill and attention. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for, and have control over, construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures, and for coordinating all portions of the Work under the Contract. If the Contract Documents give specific instructions concerning construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, the Contractor shall evaluate the jobsite safety thereof and shall be solely responsible for the jobsite safety of such means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures. If the Contractor determines that such means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures may not be safe, the Contractor shall give timely notice to the Owner and Architect, and shall propose alternative means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures. The Architect shall evaluate the proposed alternative solely for conformance with the design intent for the completed construction. Unless the Architect objects to the Contractor’s proposed alternative, the Contractor shall perform the Work using its alternative means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures. § 3.3.2 The Contractor shall be responsible to the Owner for acts and omissions of the Contractor’s employees, Subcontractors and their agents and employees, and other persons or entities performing portions of the Work for, or on behalf of, the Contractor or any of its Subcontractors. § 3.3.3 The Contractor shall be responsible for inspection of portions of Work already performed to determine that such portions are in proper condition to receive subsequent Work. § 3.4 Labor and Materials § 3.4.1 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall provide and pay for labor, materials, equipment, tools, construction equipment and machinery, water, heat, utilities, transportation, and other facilities and services necessary for proper execution and completion of the Work, whether temporary or permanent and whether or not incorporated or to be incorporated in the Work. § 3.4.2 Except in the case of minor changes in the Work approved by the Architect in accordance with Section 3.12.8 or ordered by the Architect in accordance with Section 7.4, the Contractor may make substitutions only with the consent of the Owner, after evaluation by the Architect and in accordance with a Change Order or Construction Change Directive. Page 292 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 15 § 3.4.3 The Contractor shall enforce strict discipline and good order among the Contractor’s employees and other persons carrying out the Work. The Contractor shall not permit employment of unfit persons or persons not properly skilled in tasks assigned to them. § 3.5 Warranty § 3.5.1 The Contractor warrants to the Owner and Architect that materials and equipment furnished under the Contract will be of good quality and new unless the Contract Documents require or permit otherwise. The Contractor further warrants that the Work will conform to the requirements of the Contract Documents and will be free from defects, except for those inherent in the quality of the Work the Contract Documents require or permit. Work, materials, or equipment not conforming to these requirements may be considered defective. Contractor warrants their labor and installation for the first year, beginning day 1 after installation. Owner shall rely exclusives upon warranties provided by supplier of all products sold. The Contractor’s warranty excludes remedy for damage or defect caused by abuse, alterations to the Work not executed by the Contractor, improper or insufficient maintenance, improper operation, or normal wear and tear and normal usage. If required by the Architect, the Contractor shall furnish satisfactory evidence as to the kind and quality of materials and equipment. § 3.5.2 All material, equipment, or other special warranties required by the Contract Documents shall be issued in the name of the Owner, or shall be transferable to the Owner, and shall commence in accordance with Section 9.8.4. § 3.6 Taxes The Contractor shall pay sales, consumer, use and similar taxes for the Work provided by the Contractor that are legally enacted when bids are received or negotiations concluded, whether or not yet effective or merely scheduled to go into effect. § 3.7 Permits, Fees, Notices and Compliance with Laws § 3.7.1 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall secure and pay for the building permit as well as for other permits, fees, licenses, and inspections by government agencies necessary for proper execution and completion of the Work that are customarily secured after execution of the Contract and legally required at the time bids are received or negotiations concluded. § 3.7.2 The Contractor shall comply with and give notices required by applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations, and lawful orders of public authorities applicable to performance of the Work. § 3.7.3 If the Contractor performs Work knowing it to be contrary to applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations, or lawful orders of public authorities, the Contractor shall assume appropriate responsibility for such Work and shall bear the costs attributable to correction. § 3.7.4 Concealed or Unknown Conditions If the Contractor encounters conditions at the site that are (1) subsurface or otherwise concealed physical conditions that differ materially from those indicated in the Contract Documents or (2) unknown physical conditions of an unusual nature that differ materially from those ordinarily found to exist and generally recognized as inherent in construction activities of the character provided for in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall promptly provide notice to the Owner and the Architect before conditions are disturbed and in no event later than 10 days after first observance of the conditions. The Architect will promptly investigate such conditions and, if the Architect determines that they differ materially and cause an increase or decrease in the Contractor’s cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the Work, will recommend that an equitable adjustment be made in the Contract Sum or Contract Time, or both. If the Architect determines that the conditions at the site are not materially different from those indicated in the Contract Documents and that no change in the terms of the Contract is justified, the Architect shall promptly notify the Owner and Contractor, stating the reasons § 3.7.5 If, in the course of the Work, the Contractor encounters human remains or recognizes the existence of burial markers, archaeological sites or wetlands not indicated in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall immediately suspend any operations that would affect them and shall notify the Owner and Architect. Upon receipt of such notice, the Owner shall promptly take any action necessary to obtain governmental authorization required to resume the operations. The Contractor shall continue to suspend such operations until otherwise instructed by the Owner but shall continue with all other operations that do not affect those remains or features. Requests for adjustments in the Contract Sum and Contract Time arising from the existence of such remains or features may be made as provided in Article 15. Page 293 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 16 § 3.8 Allowances § 3.8.1 The Contractor shall include in the Contract Sum all allowances stated in the Contract Documents. Items covered by allowances shall be supplied for such amounts and by such persons or entities as the Owner may direct, but the Contractor shall not be required to employ persons or entities to whom the Contractor has reasonable objection. § 3.8.2 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, .1 allowances shall cover the cost to the Contractor of materials and equipment delivered at the site and all required taxes, less applicable trade discounts; .2 Contractor’s costs for unloading and handling at the site, labor, installation costs, overhead, profit, and other expenses contemplated for stated allowance amounts shall be included in the Contract Sum but not in the allowances; and .3 whenever costs are more than or less than allowances, the Contract Sum shall be adjusted accordingly by Change Order. The amount of the Change Order shall reflect (1) the difference between actual costs and the allowances under Section 3.8.2.1 and (2) changes in Contractor’s costs under Section 3.8.2.2. § 3.8.3 Materials and equipment under an allowance shall be selected by the Owner with reasonable promptness. § 3.9 Superintendent § 3.9.1 The Contractor shall employ a competent superintendent and necessary assistants who shall be in attendance at the Project site during performance of the Work. The superintendent shall represent the Contractor, and communications given to the superintendent shall be as binding as if given to the Contractor. § 3.9.2 The Contractor, as soon as practicable after award of the Contract, shall notify the Owner and Architect of the name and qualifications of a proposed superintendent. Within 14 days of receipt of the information, the Architect may notify the Contractor, stating whether the Owner or the Architect (1) has reasonable objection to the proposed superintendent or (2) requires additional time for review. Failure of the Architect to provide notice within the 14-day period shall constitute notice of no reasonable objection. § 3.9.3 The Contractor shall not employ a proposed superintendent to whom the Owner or Architect has made reasonable and timely objection. The Contractor shall not change the superintendent without the Owner’s consent, which shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed. § 3.10 Contractor’s Construction and Submittal Schedules § 3.10.1 The Contractor, promptly after being awarded the Contract, shall submit for the Owner’s and Architect’s information a Contractor’s construction schedule for the Work. The schedule shall contain detail appropriate for the Project, including (1) the date of commencement of the Work, interim schedule milestone dates, and the date of Substantial Completion; (2) an apportionment of the Work by construction activity; and (3) the time required for completion of each portion of the Work. The schedule shall provide for the orderly progression of the Work to completion and shall not exceed time limits current under the Contract Documents. The schedule shall be revised at appropriate intervals as required by the conditions of the Work and Project. § 3.10.2 The Contractor, promptly after being awarded the Contract and thereafter as necessary to maintain a current submittal schedule, shall submit a submittal schedule for the Architect’s approval. The Architect’s approval shall not be unreasonably delayed or withheld. The submittal schedule shall (1) be coordinated with the Contractor’s construction schedule, and (2) allow the Architect reasonable time to review submittals. If the Contractor fails to submit a submittal schedule, or fails to provide submittals in accordance with the approved submittal schedule, the Contractor shall not be entitled to any increase in Contract Sum or extension of Contract Time based on the time required for review of submittals. § 3.10.3 The Contractor shall perform the Work in general accordance with the most recent schedules submitted to the Owner and Architect. § 3.11 Documents and Samples at the Site The Contractor shall make available, at the Project site, the Contract Documents, including Change Orders, Construction Change Directives, and other Modifications, in good order and marked currently to indicate field changes and selections made during construction, and the approved Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples, and Page 294 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 17 similar required submittals. These shall be in electronic form or paper copy, available to the Architect and Owner, and delivered to the Architect for submittal to the Owner upon completion of the Work as a record of the Work as constructed. § 3.12 Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples § 3.12.1 Shop Drawings are drawings, diagrams, schedules, and other data specially prepared for the Work by the Contractor or a Subcontractor, Sub-subcontractor, manufacturer, supplier, or distributor to illustrate some portion of the Work. § 3.12.2 Product Data are illustrations, standard schedules, performance charts, instructions, brochures, diagrams, and other information furnished by the Contractor to illustrate materials or equipment for some portion of the Work. § 3.12.3 Samples are physical examples that illustrate materials, equipment, or workmanship, and establish standards by which the Work will be judged. § 3.12.4 Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples, and similar submittals are not Contract Documents. Their purpose is to demonstrate how the Contractor proposes to conform to the information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents for those portions of the Work for which the Contract Documents require submittals. Review by the Architect is subject to the limitations of Section 4.2.7. Informational submittals upon which the Architect is not expected to take responsive action may be so identified in the Contract Documents. Submittals that are not required by the Contract Documents may be returned by the Architect without action. § 3.12.5 The Contractor shall review for compliance with the Contract Documents, approve, and submit to the Architect, Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples, and similar submittals required by the Contract Documents, in accordance with the submittal schedule approved by the Architect or, in the absence of an approved submittal schedule, with reasonable promptness and in such sequence as to cause no delay in the Work or in the activities of the Owner or of Separate Contractors. § 3.12.6 By submitting Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples, and similar submittals, the Contractor represents to the Owner and Architect that the Contractor has (1) reviewed and approved them, (2) determined and verified materials, field measurements and field construction criteria related thereto, or will do so, and (3) checked and coordinated the information contained within such submittals with the requirements of the Work and of the Contract Documents. § 3.12.7 The Contractor shall perform no portion of the Work for which the Contract Documents require submittal and review of Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples, or similar submittals, until the respective submittal has been approved by the Architect. § 3.12.8 The Work shall be in accordance with approved submittals except that the Contractor shall not be relieved of responsibility for deviations from the requirements of the Contract Documents by the Architect’s approval of Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples, or similar submittals, unless the Contractor has specifically notified the Architect of such deviation at the time of submittal and (1) the Architect has given written approval to the specific deviation as a minor change in the Work, or (2) a Change Order or Construction Change Directive has been issued authorizing the deviation. The Contractor shall not be relieved of responsibility for errors or omissions in Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples, or similar submittals, by the Architect’s approval thereof. § 3.12.9 The Contractor shall direct specific attention, in writing or on resubmitted Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples, or similar submittals, to revisions other than those requested by the Architect on previous submittals. In the absence of such notice, the Architect’s approval of a resubmission shall not apply to such revisions. § 3.12.10 The Contractor shall not be required to provide professional services that constitute the practice of architecture or engineering unless such services are specifically required by the Contract Documents for a portion of the Work or unless the Contractor needs to provide such services in order to carry out the Contractor’s responsibilities for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures. The Contractor shall not be required to provide professional services in violation of applicable law. Page 295 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 18 § 3.12.10.1 If professional design services or certifications by a design professional related to systems, materials, or equipment are specifically required of the Contractor by the Contract Documents, the Owner and the Architect will specify all performance and design criteria that such services must satisfy. The Contractor shall be entitled to rely upon the adequacy and accuracy of the performance and design criteria provided in the Contract Documents. The Contractor shall cause such services or certifications to be provided by an appropriately licensed design professional, whose signature and seal shall appear on all drawings, calculations, specifications, certifications, Shop Drawings, and other submittals prepared by such professional. Shop Drawings, and other submittals related to the Work, designed or certified by such professional, if prepared by others, shall bear such professional’s written approval when submitted to the Architect. The Owner and the Architect shall be entitled to rely upon the adequacy and accuracy of the services, certifications, and approvals performed or provided by such design professionals, provided the Owner and Architect have specified to the Contractor the performance and design criteria that such services must satisfy. Pursuant to this Section 3.12.10, the Architect will review and approve or take other appropriate action on submittals only for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. § 3.12.10.2 If the Contract Documents require the Contractor’s design professional to certify that the Work has been performed in accordance with the design criteria, the Contractor shall furnish such certifications to the Architect at the time and in the form specified by the Architect. § 3.13 Use of Site The Contractor shall confine operations at the site to areas permitted by applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations, lawful orders of public authorities, and the Contract Documents and shall not unreasonably encumber the site with materials or equipment. § 3.14 Cutting and Patching § 3.14.1 The Contractor shall be responsible for cutting, fitting, or patching required to complete the Work or to make its parts fit together properly. All areas requiring cutting, fitting, or patching shall be restored to the condition existing prior to the cutting, fitting, or patching, unless otherwise required by the Contract Documents. § 3.14.2 The Contractor shall not damage or endanger a portion of the Work or fully or partially completed construction of the Owner or Separate Contractors by cutting, patching, or otherwise altering such construction, or by excavation. The Contractor shall not cut or otherwise alter construction by the Owner or a Separate Contractor except with written consent of the Owner and of the Separate Contractor. Consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. The Contractor shall not unreasonably withhold, from the Owner or a Separate Contractor, its consent to cutting or otherwise altering the Work. § 3.15 Cleaning Up § 3.15.1 The Contractor shall keep the premises and surrounding area free from accumulation of waste materials and rubbish caused by operations under the Contract. At completion of the Work, the Contractor shall remove waste materials, rubbish, the Contractor’s tools, construction equipment, machinery, and surplus materials from and about the Project. § 3.15.2 If the Contractor fails to clean up as provided in the Contract Documents, the Owner may do so and the Owner shall be entitled to reimbursement from the Contractor. § 3.16 Access to Work The Contractor shall provide the Owner and Architect with access to the Work in preparation and progress wherever located. § 3.17 Royalties, Patents and Copyrights The Contractor shall pay all royalties and license fees. The Contractor shall defend suits or claims for infringement of copyrights and patent rights and shall hold the Owner and Architect harmless from loss on account thereof, but shall not be responsible for defense or loss when a particular design, process, or product of a particular manufacturer or manufacturers is required by the Contract Documents, or where the copyright violations are contained in Drawings, Specifications, or other documents prepared by the Owner or Architect. However, if an infringement of a copyright or patent is discovered by, or made known to, the Contractor, the Contractor shall be responsible for the loss unless the information is promptly furnished to the Architect. Page 296 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 19 § 3.18 Indemnification § 3.18.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the Owner, Architect, Architect’s consultants, and agents and employees of any of them from and against claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from performance of the Work, provided that such claim, damage, loss, or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease or death, or to injury to or destruction of tangible property (other than the Work itself), but only to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone for whose acts they may be liable, regardless of whether or not such claim, damage, loss, or expense is caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder. Such obligation shall not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce other rights or obligations of indemnity that would otherwise exist as to a party or person described in this Section 3.18. § 3.18.2 In claims against any person or entity indemnified under this Section 3.18 by an employee of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone for whose acts they may be liable, the indemnification obligation under Section 3.18.1 shall not be limited by a limitation on amount or type of damages, compensation, or benefits payable by or for the Contractor or a Subcontractor under workers’ compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefit acts. ARTICLE 4 ARCHITECT § 4.1 General § 4.1.1 The Architect is the person or entity retained by the Owner pursuant to Section 2.3.2 and identified as such in the Agreement. § 4.1.2 Duties, responsibilities, and limitations of authority of the Architect as set forth in the Contract Documents shall not be restricted, modified, or extended without written consent of the Owner, Contractor, and Architect. Consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Interpretations and decisions of the Architect will be consistent with the intent of, and reasonably inferable from, the Contract Documents and will be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and decisions, the Architect will endeavor to secure faithful performance by Contractor, and will not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions rendered in good faith. § 4.2 Administration of the Contract § 4.2.1 The Architect will provide administration of the Contract as described in the Contract Documents and will be an Owner’s representative during construction until the date the Architect issues the final Certificate for Payment. The Architect will have authority to act on behalf of the Owner only to the extent provided in the Contract Documents. § 4.2.2 The Architect will visit the site at intervals appropriate to the stage of construction, or as otherwise agreed with the Owner, to become generally familiar with the progress and quality of the portion of the Work completed, and to determine in general if the Work observed is being performed in a manner indicating that the Work, when fully completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents. However, the Architect will not be required to make exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work. The Architect will not have control over, charge of, or responsibility for the construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for the safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work, since these are solely the Contractor’s rights and responsibilities under the Contract Documents. § 4.2.3 On the basis of the site visits, the Architect will keep the Owner reasonably informed about the progress and quality of the portion of the Work completed, and promptly report to the Owner (1) known deviations from the Contract Documents, (2) known deviations from the most recent construction schedule submitted by the Contractor, and (3) defects and deficiencies observed in the Work. The Architect will not be responsible for the Contractor’s failure to perform the Work in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Architect will not have control over or charge of, and will not be responsible for acts or omissions of, the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. § 4.2.4 Communications The Owner and Contractor shall include the Architect in all communications that relate to or affect the Architect’s services or professional responsibilities. The Owner shall promptly notify the Architect of the substance of any direct communications between the Owner and the Contractor otherwise relating to the Project. Communications by and Page 297 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 20 with the Architect’s consultants shall be through the Architect. Communications by and with Subcontractors and suppliers shall be through the Contractor. Communications by and with Separate Contractors shall be through the Owner. The Contract Documents may specify other communication protocols. § 4.2.5 Based on the Architect’s evaluations of the Contractor’s Applications for Payment, the Architect will review and certify the amounts due the Contractor and will issue Certificates for Payment in such amounts. § 4.2.6 The Architect has authority to reject Work that does not conform to the Contract Documents. Whenever the Architect considers it necessary or advisable, the Architect will have authority to require inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with Sections 13.4.2 and 13.4.3, whether or not the Work is fabricated, installed or completed. However, neither this authority of the Architect nor a decision made in good faith either to exercise or not to exercise such authority shall give rise to a duty or responsibility of the Architect to the Contractor, Subcontractors, suppliers, their agents or employees, or other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. § 4.2.7 The Architect will review and approve, or take other appropriate action upon, the Contractor’s submittals such as Shop Drawings, Product Data, and Samples, but only for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. The Architect’s action will be taken in accordance with the submittal schedule approved by the Architect or, in the absence of an approved submittal schedule, with reasonable promptness while allowing sufficient time in the Architect’s professional judgment to permit adequate review. Review of such submittals is not conducted for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other details such as dimensions and quantities, or for substantiating instructions for installation or performance of equipment or systems, all of which remain the responsibility of the Contractor as required by the Contract Documents. The Architect’s review of the Contractor’s submittals shall not relieve the Contractor of the obligations under Sections 3.3, 3.5, and 3.12. The Architect’s review shall not constitute approval of safety precautions or of any construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures. The Architect’s approval of a specific item shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which the item is a component. § 4.2.8 The Architect will prepare Change Orders and Construction Change Directives, and may order minor changes in the Work as provided in Section 7.4. The Architect will investigate and make determinations and recommendations regarding concealed and unknown conditions as provided in Section 3.7.4. § 4.2.9 The Architect will conduct inspections to determine the date or dates of Substantial Completion and the date of final completion; issue Certificates of Substantial Completion pursuant to Section 9.8; receive and forward to the Owner, for the Owner’s review and records, written warranties and related documents required by the Contract and assembled by the Contractor pursuant to Section 9.10; and issue a final Certificate for Payment pursuant to Section 9.10. § 4.2.10 If the Owner and Architect agree, the Architect will provide one or more Project representatives to assist in carrying out the Architect’s responsibilities at the site. The Owner shall notify the Contractor of any change in the duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of the Project representatives. § 4.2.11 The Architect will interpret and decide matters concerning performance under, and requirements of, the Contract Documents on written request of either the Owner or Contractor. The Architect’s response to such requests will be made in writing within any time limits agreed upon or otherwise with reasonable promptness. § 4.2.12 Interpretations and decisions of the Architect will be consistent with the intent of, and reasonably inferable from, the Contract Documents and will be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and decisions, the Architect will endeavor to secure faithful performance by both Owner and Contractor, will not show partiality to either, and will not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions rendered in good faith. § 4.2.13 The Owner’s decisions on matters relating to aesthetic effect will be final if consistent with the intent expressed in the Contract Documents. § 4.2.14 The Architect will review and respond to requests for information about the Contract Documents. The Architect’s response to such requests will be made in writing within any time limits agreed upon or otherwise with reasonable promptness. If appropriate, the Architect will prepare and issue supplemental Drawings and Specifications in response to the requests for information. Page 298 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 21 ARTICLE 5 SUBCONTRACTORS § 5.1 Definitions § 5.1.1 A Subcontractor is a person or entity who has a direct contract with the Contractor to perform a portion of the Work at the site. The term "Subcontractor" is referred to throughout the Contract Documents as if singular in number and means a Subcontractor or an authorized representative of the Subcontractor. The term "Subcontractor" does not include a Separate Contractor or the subcontractors of a Separate Contractor. § 5.1.2 A Sub-subcontractor is a person or entity who has a direct or indirect contract with a Subcontractor to perform a portion of the Work at the site. The term "Sub-subcontractor" is referred to throughout the Contract Documents as if singular in number and means a Sub-subcontractor or an authorized representative of the Sub-subcontractor. § 5.2 Award of Subcontracts and Other Contracts for Portions of the Work § 5.2.1 Unless otherwise stated in the Contract Documents, the Contractor, as soon as practicable after award of the Contract, shall notify the Owner and Architect of the persons or entities proposed for each principal portion of the Work, including those who are to furnish materials or equipment fabricated to a special design. Within 14 days of receipt of the information, the Architect may notify the Contractor whether the Owner or the Architect (1) has reasonable objection to any such proposed person or entity or (2) requires additional time for review. Failure of the Architect to provide notice within the 14-day period shall constitute notice of no reasonable objection. § 5.2.2 The Contractor shall not contract with a proposed person or entity to whom the Owner or Architect has made reasonable and timely objection. The Contractor shall not be required to contract with anyone to whom the Contractor has made reasonable objection. § 5.2.3 If the Owner or Architect has reasonable objection to a person or entity proposed by the Contractor, the Contractor shall propose another to whom the Owner or Architect has no reasonable objection. If the proposed but rejected Subcontractor was reasonably capable of performing the Work, the Contract Sum and Contract Time shall be increased or decreased by the difference, if any, occasioned by such change, and an appropriate Change Order shall be issued before commencement of the substitute Subcontractor’s Work. However, no increase in the Contract Sum or Contract Time shall be allowed for such change unless the Contractor has acted promptly and responsively in submitting names as required. § 5.2.4 The Contractor shall not substitute a Subcontractor, person, or entity for one previously selected if the Owner or Architect makes reasonable objection to such substitution. § 5.3 Subcontractual Relations By appropriate written agreement, the Contractor shall require each Subcontractor, to the extent of the Work to be performed by the Subcontractor, to be bound to the Contractor by terms of the Contract Documents, and to assume toward the Contractor all the obligations and responsibilities, including the responsibility for safety of the Subcontractor’s Work that the Contractor, by these Contract Documents, assumes toward the Owner and Architect. Each subcontract agreement shall preserve and protect the rights of the Owner and Architect under the Contract Documents with respect to the Work to be performed by the Subcontractor so that subcontracting thereof will not prejudice such rights, and shall allow to the Subcontractor, unless specifically provided otherwise in the subcontract agreement, the benefit of all rights, remedies, and redress against the Contractor that the Contractor, by the Contract Documents, has against the Owner. Where appropriate, the Contractor shall require each Subcontractor to enter into similar agreements with Sub-subcontractors. The Contractor shall make available to each proposed Subcontractor, prior to the execution of the subcontract agreement, copies of the Contract Documents to which the Subcontractor will be bound, and, upon written request of the Subcontractor, identify to the Subcontractor terms and conditions of the proposed subcontract agreement that may be at variance with the Contract Documents. Subcontractors will similarly make copies of applicable portions of such documents available to their respective proposed Sub-subcontractors. § 5.4 Contingent Assignment of Subcontracts § 5.4.1 Each subcontract agreement for a portion of the Work is assigned by the Contractor to the Owner, provided that .1 assignment is effective only after termination of the Contract by the Owner for cause pursuant to Section 14.2 and only for those subcontract agreements that the Owner accepts by notifying the Subcontractor and Contractor; and Page 299 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 22 .2 assignment is subject to the prior rights of the surety, if any, obligated under bond relating to the Contract. When the Owner accepts the assignment of a subcontract agreement, the Owner assumes the Contractor’s rights and obligations under the subcontract. § 5.4.2 Upon such assignment, if the Work has been suspended for more than 30 days, the Subcontractor’s compensation shall be equitably adjusted for increases in cost resulting from the suspension. § 5.4.3 Upon assignment to the Owner under this Section 5.4, the Owner may further assign the subcontract to a successor contractor or other entity. If the Owner assigns the subcontract to a successor contractor or other entity, the Owner shall nevertheless remain legally responsible for all of the successor contractor’s obligations under the subcontract. ARTICLE 6 CONSTRUCTION BY OWNER OR BY SEPARATE CONTRACTORS § 6.1 Owner’s Right to Perform Construction and to Award Separate Contracts § 6.1.1 The term "Separate Contractor(s)" shall mean other contractors retained by the Owner under separate agreements. The Owner reserves the right to perform construction or operations related to the Project with the Owner’s own forces, and with Separate Contractors retained under Conditions of the Contract substantially similar to those of this Contract, including those provisions of the Conditions of the Contract related to insurance and waiver of subrogation. § 6.1.2 When separate contracts are awarded for different portions of the Project or other construction or operations on the site, the term "Contractor" in the Contract Documents in each case shall mean the Contractor who executes each separate Owner-Contractor Agreement. § 6.1.3 The Owner shall provide for coordination of the activities of the Owner’s own forces and of each Separate Contractor with the Work of the Contractor, who shall cooperate with them. The Contractor shall participate with any Separate Contractors and the Owner in reviewing their construction schedules. The Contractor shall make any revisions to its construction schedule deemed necessary after a joint review and mutual agreement. The construction schedules shall then constitute the schedules to be used by the Contractor, Separate Contractors, and the Owner until subsequently revised. § 6.1.4 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, when the Owner performs construction or operations related to the Project with the Owner’s own forces or with Separate Contractors, the Owner or its Separate Contractors shall have the same obligations and rights that the Contractor has under the Conditions of the Contract, including, without excluding others, those stated in Article 3, this Article 6, and Articles 10, 11, and 12. § 6.2 Mutual Responsibility § 6.2.1 The Contractor shall afford the Owner and Separate Contractors reasonable opportunity for introduction and storage of their materials and equipment and performance of their activities, and shall connect and coordinate the Contractor’s construction and operations with theirs as required by the Contract Documents. § 6.2.2 If part of the Contractor’s Work depends for proper execution or results upon construction or operations by the Owner or a Separate Contractor, the Contractor shall, prior to proceeding with that portion of the Work, promptly notify the Architect of apparent discrepancies or defects in the construction or operations by the Owner or Separate Contractor that would render it unsuitable for proper execution and results of the Contractor’s Work. Failure of the Contractor to notify the Architect of apparent discrepancies or defects prior to proceeding with the Work shall constitute an acknowledgment that the Owner’s or Separate Contractor’s completed or partially completed construction is fit and proper to receive the Contractor’s Work. The Contractor shall not be responsible for discrepancies or defects in the construction or operations by the Owner or Separate Contractor that are not apparent. § 6.2.3 The Contractor shall reimburse the Owner for costs the Owner incurs that are payable to a Separate Contractor because of the Contractor’s delays, improperly timed activities or defective construction. The Owner shall be responsible to the Contractor for costs the Contractor incurs because of a Separate Contractor’s delays, improperly timed activities, damage to the Work or defective construction. Page 300 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 23 § 6.2.4 The Contractor shall promptly remedy damage that the Contractor wrongfully causes to completed or partially completed construction or to property of the Owner or Separate Contractor as provided in Section 10.2.5. § 6.2.5 The Owner and each Separate Contractor shall have the same responsibilities for cutting and patching as are described for the Contractor in Section 3.14. § 6.3 Owner’s Right to Clean Up If a dispute arises among the Contractor, Separate Contractors, and the Owner as to the responsibility under their respective contracts for maintaining the premises and surrounding area free from waste materials and rubbish, the Owner may clean up and the Architect will allocate the cost among those responsible. ARTICLE 7 CHANGES IN THE WORK § 7.1 General § 7.1.1 Changes in the Work may be accomplished after execution of the Contract, and without invalidating the Contract, by Change Order, Construction Change Directive or order for a minor change in the Work, subject to the limitations stated in this Article 7 and elsewhere in the Contract Documents. § 7.1.2 A Change Order shall be based upon agreement among the Owner, Contractor, and Architect. Owner may request changes or modifications when needed however, these shall be treated as a non-binding request unless and until Owner, Contractor, and Architect have agreed in writing of the changes and any change in cost related to product, shipping, restocking fees, or other costs. An order for a minor change in the Work may be issued by the Architect alone. § 7.1.3 Changes in the Work shall be performed under applicable provisions of the Contract Documents. The Contractor shall proceed promptly with changes in the Work, unless otherwise provided in the Change Order, Construction Change Directive, or order for a minor change in the Work. Overhead and Profit (OH&P) for changes in work shall be limited to the following: 10% OH&P for all work self-preformed by Contractors own forces 5% OH&P for all subcontracted work. 5% OH&P for all work by subcontractors. Work performed by a combination of Contractors and Sub-Contractors shall not exceed a total of 10%OH&P § 7.2 Change Orders § 7.2.1 A Change Order is a written instrument prepared by the Architect and signed by the Owner, Contractor, and Architect stating their agreement upon all of the following: .1 The change in the Work; .2 The amount of the adjustment, if any, in the Contract Sum; and .3 The extent of the adjustment, if any, in the Contract Time. § 7.3 Construction Change Directives § 7.3.1 A Construction Change Directive is a written order prepared by the Architect and signed by the Owner and Architect, directing a change in the Work prior to agreement on adjustment, if any, in the Contract Sum or Contract Time, or both. The Owner may by Construction Change Directive, without invalidating the Contract, order changes in the Work within the general scope of the Contract consisting of additions, deletions, or other revisions, the Contract Sum and Contract Time being adjusted accordingly. § 7.3.2 A Construction Change Directive shall be used in the absence of total agreement on the terms of a Change Order. § 7.3.3 If the Construction Change Directive provides for an adjustment to the Contract Sum, the adjustment shall be based on one of the following methods: .1 Mutual acceptance of a lump sum properly itemized and supported by sufficient substantiating data to permit evaluation; .2 Unit prices stated in the Contract Documents or subsequently agreed upon; Page 301 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 24 .3 Cost to be determined in a manner agreed upon by the parties and a mutually acceptable fixed or percentage fee; or .4 As provided in Section 7.3.4. § 7.3.4 If the Contractor does not respond promptly or disagrees with the method for adjustment in the Contract Sum, the Architect shall determine the adjustment on the basis of reasonable expenditures and savings of those performing the Work attributable to the change, including, in case of an increase in the Contract Sum, an amount for overhead and profit as set forth in the Agreement, or if no such amount is set forth in the Agreement, a reasonable amount. In such case, and also under Section 7.3.3.3, the Contractor shall keep and present, in such form as the Architect may prescribe, an itemized accounting together with appropriate supporting data. Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, costs for the purposes of this Section 7.3.4 shall be limited to the following: .1 Costs of labor, including applicable payroll taxes, fringe benefits required by agreement or custom, workers’ compensation insurance, and other employee costs approved by the Architect; .2 Costs of materials, supplies, and equipment, including cost of transportation, whether incorporated or consumed; .3 Rental costs of machinery and equipment, exclusive of hand tools, whether rented from the Contractor or others; .4 Costs of premiums for all bonds and insurance, permit fees, and sales, use, or similar taxes, directly related to the change; and .5 Costs of supervision and field office personnel directly attributable to the change. § 7.3.5 If the Contractor disagrees with the adjustment in the Contract Time, the Contractor may make a Claim in accordance with applicable provisions of Article 15. Contractor will not be held responsible for supplier’s failure to accept any changes. § 7.3.6 Upon receipt of a Construction Change Directive, the Contractor shall promptly proceed with the change in the Work involved and advise the Architect of the Contractor’s agreement or disagreement with the method, if any, provided in the Construction Change Directive for determining the proposed adjustment in the Contract Sum or Contract Time. § 7.3.7 A Construction Change Directive signed by the Contractor indicates the Contractor’s agreement therewith, including adjustment in Contract Sum and Contract Time or the method for determining them. Such agreement shall be effective immediately and shall be recorded as a Change Order. § 7.3.8 The amount of credit to be allowed by the Contractor to the Owner for a deletion or change that results in a net decrease in the Contract Sum shall be actual net cost as confirmed by the Architect. When both additions and credits covering related Work or substitutions are involved in a change, the allowance for overhead and profit shall be figured on the basis of net increase, if any, with respect to that change. § 7.3.9 Pending final determination of the total cost of a Construction Change Directive to the Owner, the Contractor may request payment for Work completed under the Construction Change Directive in Applications for Payment. The Architect will make an interim determination for purposes of monthly certification for payment for those costs and certify for payment the amount that the Architect determines, in the Architect’s professional judgment, to be reasonably justified. The Architect’s interim determination of cost shall adjust the Contract Sum on the same basis as a Change. § 7.3.10 When the Owner and Contractor agree with a determination made by the Architect concerning the adjustments in the Contract Sum and Contract Time, or otherwise reach agreement upon the adjustments, such agreement shall be effective immediately and the Architect will prepare a Change Order. Change Orders may be issued for all or any part of a Construction Change Directive. § 7.4 Minor Changes in the Work The Architect may order minor changes in the Work that are consistent with the intent of the Contract Documents and do not involve an adjustment in the Contract Sum or an extension of the Contract Time. The Architect’s order for minor changes shall be in writing. If the Contractor believes that the proposed minor change in the Work will affect the Contract Sum or Contract Time, the Contractor shall notify the Architect and shall not proceed to implement the change in the Work. If the Contractor performs the Work set forth in the Architect’s order for a minor change without Page 302 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 25 prior notice to the Architect that such change will affect the Contract Sum or Contract Time, the Contractor waives any adjustment to the Contract Sum or extension of the Contract Time. ARTICLE 8 TIME § 8.1 Definitions § 8.1.1 Unless otherwise provided, Contract Time is the period of time, including authorized adjustments, allotted in the Contract Documents for Substantial Completion of the Work. § 8.1.2 The date of commencement of the Work is the date established in the Agreement. § 8.1.3 The date of Substantial Completion is the date certified by the Architect in accordance with Section 9.8. § 8.1.4 The term "day" as used in the Contract Documents shall mean calendar day unless otherwise specifically defined. § 8.2 Progress and Completion § 8.2.1 Time limits stated in the Contract Documents are of the essence of the Contract. By executing the Agreement, the Contractor confirms that the Contract Time is a reasonable period for performing the Work Contractor will inform Owner of estimate date of delivery and install for products when Contractor receives an estimated shipping date from its supplier/product manufacturer. Owner agrees that the Estimated Delivery Date is an estimate, not a guarantee, and is subject to change. Lead times vary widely by manufacturer, series, finish, and Owner’s customer-own material (COM) fabric. Contractor shall not be liable for any delays in delivery and will take commercially reasonable steps to facilitate timely delivery or performance. § 8.2.2 The Contractor shall not knowingly, except by agreement or instruction of the Owner in writing, commence the Work prior to the effective date of insurance required to be furnished by the Contractor and Owner. § 8.2.3 The Contractor shall proceed expeditiously with adequate forces and shall achieve Substantial Completion within the Contract Time. § 8.3 Delays and Extensions of Time § 8.3.1 If the Contractor is delayed at any time in the progress of the Work or the sequencing of the work by an act or neglect of the Owner or Architect, of an employee of either, or of a Separate Contractor employed by the Owner, or by changes ordered in the Work or by fires, unusual delay in deliveries, unavoidable casualties, or other causes beyond the Contractor’s or a Subcontractor’s or supplier’s controor other causes which the Architect determines may justify delay, then the Contract Time shall be extended by Change Order without notice to sureties, for such reasonable time as the Architect may determine. A time extension shall be Contractor’s sole remedy and compensation for all such delays and changes in sequencing. . (Paragraph deleted) § 8.3.3 This Section 8.3 precludes recovery of damages for delay by Contractor if the Contractor is delayed at any time in the progress of the Work or the sequencing of work by an act or neglect of the Owner or the Architect or of any employee of either or of a separate contractor employed by the Owner, or by changes ordered in the Work, or by fires, unusual delays in deliveries, unavoidable casualties or other causes beyond the Contractor’s or a Subcontractor’s or suppliers control and not reasonably anticipatable, or by other causes which the Architect determines may justify delay, then the Contract Time shall be extended by Change Order without notice to sureties, for such reasonable time as the Architect may determine. A time extension shall be the Contractor’s sole remedy and compensation for all such delays and changes in sequencing. . ARTICLE 9 PAYMENTS AND COMPLETION § 9.1 Contract Sum § 9.1.1 The Contract Sum is stated in the Agreement and, including authorized adjustments, is the total amount payable by the Owner to the Contractor for performance of the Work under the Contract Documents. Page 303 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 26 § 9.1.2 If unit prices are stated in the Contract Documents or subsequently agreed upon, and if quantities originally contemplated are materially changed so that application of such unit prices to the actual quantities causes substantial inequity to the Owner or Contractor, the applicable unit prices shall be equitably adjusted. § 9.2 Schedule of Values Where the Contract is based on a stipulated sum or Guaranteed Maximum Price, the Contractor shall submit a schedule of values to the Architect before the first Application for Payment, allocating the entire Contract Sum to the various portions of the Work. The schedule of values shall be prepared in the form, and supported by the data to substantiate its accuracy, required by the Architect. This schedule, unless objected to by the Architect, shall be used as a basis for reviewing the Contractor’s Applications for Payment. Any changes to the schedule of values shall be submitted to the Architect and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the Architect may require, and unless objected to by the Architect, shall be used as a basis for reviewing the Contractor’s subsequent Applications for Payment. § 9.3 Applications for Payment § 9.3.1 At least ten days before the date established for each progress payment, the Contractor shall submit to the Architect an itemized Application for Payment prepared in accordance with the schedule of values, if required under Section 9.2, for completed portions of the Work. The application shall be notarized, if required, and supported by all data substantiating the Contractor’s right to payment that the Owner or Architect require, such as copies of requisitions, and releases and waivers of liens from Subcontractors and suppliers, and shall reflect retainage if provided for in the Contract Documents. § 9.3.1.1 As provided in Section 7.3.9, such applications may include requests for payment on account of changes in the Work that have been properly authorized by Construction Change Directives, or by interim determinations of the Architect, but not yet included in Change Orders. § 9.3.1.2 Owner shall make 95% progress payments on account of the Contract Price on the basis of Contractor’s Applications for Payment during performance of the Work. Upon final completion of the Work, Owner shall pay the remainder of the Contract Price. Minn. Stat. § 290.92 requires that the City of Edina obtain a Withholding Affidavit for Contractors, Form IC-134, before making final payments to Contractors. This form needs to be submitted by the Contractor to the Minnesota Department of Revenue for approval. The form is used to receive certification from the state that the vendor has complied with the requirement to withhold and remit state withholding taxes for employee salaries paid. § 9.3.2 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, payments shall be made on account of materials and equipment delivered and suitably stored at the site for subsequent incorporation in the Work. If approved in advance by the Owner, payment may similarly be made for materials and equipment suitably stored off the site at a location agreed upon in writing. Payment for materials and equipment stored on or off the site shall be conditioned upon compliance by the Contractor with procedures satisfactory to the Owner to establish the Owner’s title to such materials and equipment or otherwise protect the Owner’s interest, and shall include the costs of applicable insurance, storage, and transportation to the site, for such materials and equipment stored off the site. § 9.3.3 The Contractor warrants that title to all Work covered by an Application for Payment will pass to the Owner no later than the time of payment. The Contractor further warrants that upon submittal of an Application for Payment all Work for which Certificates for Payment have been previously issued and payments received from the Owner shall, to the best of the Contractor’s knowledge, information, and belief, be free and clear of liens, claims, security interests, or encumbrances, in favor of the Contractor, Subcontractors, suppliers, or other persons or entities that provided labor, materials, and equipment relating to the Work. § 9.4 Certificates for Payment § 9.4.1 The Architect will, within seven days after receipt of the Contractor’s Application for Payment, either (1) issue to the Owner a Certificate for Payment in the full amount of the Application for Payment, with a copy to the Contractor; or (2) issue to the Owner a Certificate for Payment for such amount as the Architect determines is properly due, and notify the Contractor and Owner of the Architect’s reasons for withholding certification in part as provided in Section 9.5.1; or (3) withhold certification of the entire Application for Payment, and notify the Contractor and Owner of the Architect’s reason for withholding certification in whole as provided in Section 9.5.1. Page 304 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 27 § 9.4.2 The issuance of a Certificate for Payment will constitute a representation by the Architect to the Owner, based on the Architect’s evaluation of the Work and the data in the Application for Payment, that, to the best of the Architect’s knowledge, information, and belief, the Work has progressed to the point indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and that the Contractor is entitled to payment in the amount certified. The foregoing representations are subject to an evaluation of the Work for conformance with the Contract Documents upon Substantial Completion, to results of subsequent tests and inspections, to correction of minor deviations from the Contract Documents prior to completion, and to specific qualifications expressed by the Architect. However, the issuance of a Certificate for Payment will not be a representation that the Architect has (1) made exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work; (2) reviewed construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures; (3) reviewed copies of requisitions received from Subcontractors and suppliers and other data requested by the Owner to substantiate the Contractor’s right to payment; or (4) made examination to ascertain how or for what purpose the Contractor has used money previously paid on account of the Contract Sum. § 9.5 Decisions to Withhold Certification § 9.5.1 The Architect may withhold a Certificate for Payment in whole or in part, to the extent reasonably necessary to protect the Owner, if in the Architect’s opinion the representations to the Owner required by Section 9.4.2 cannot be made. If the Architect is unable to certify payment in the amount of the Application, the Architect will notify the Contractor and Owner as provided in Section 9.4.1. If the Contractor and Architect cannot agree on a revised amount, the Architect will promptly issue a Certificate for Payment for the amount for which the Architect is able to make such representations to the Owner. The Architect may also withhold a Certificate for Payment or, because of subsequently discovered evidence, may nullify the whole or a part of a Certificate for Payment previously issued, to such extent as may be necessary in the Architect’s opinion to protect the Owner from loss for which the Contractor is responsible, including loss resulting from acts and omissions described in Section 3.3.2, because of .1 defective Work not remedied; .2 third party claims filed or reasonable evidence indicating probable filing of such claims, unless security acceptable to the Owner is provided by the Contractor; .3 failure of the Contractor to make payments properly to Subcontractors or suppliers for labor, materials or equipment; .4 reasonable evidence that the Work cannot be completed for the unpaid balance of the Contract Sum; .5 damage to the Owner or a Separate Contractor; .6 reasonable evidence that the Work will not be completed within the Contract Time, and that the unpaid balance would not be adequate to cover actual or liquidated damages for the anticipated delay; or .7 repeated failure to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. § 9.5.2 When either party disputes the Architect’s decision regarding a Certificate for Payment under Section 9.5.1, in whole or in part, that party may submit a Claim in accordance with Article 15. § 9.5.3 When the reasons for withholding certification are removed, certification will be made for amounts previously withheld. § 9.5.4 If the Architect withholds certification for payment under Section 9.5.1.3, the Owner may, at its sole option, issue joint checks to the Contractor and to any Subcontractor or materials or equipment suppliers to whom the Contractor failed to make payment for Work properly performed or material or equipment suitably delivered. If the Owner makes payments by joint check, the Owner shall notify the Architect and the Architect shall reflect such payment on the next Certificate for Payment. § 9.6 Progress Payments § 9.6.1 After the Architect has issued a Certificate for Payment, the Owner shall make payment in the manner and within the time provided in the Contract Documents, and shall so notify the Architect. § 9.6.2 Prompt Payment to Subcontractors. In accordance with Minnesota law, the Contractor shall include, in all subcontracts and other agreements with its subcontractors and suppliers, a provision which requires the Contractor to pay any of its subcontractors and suppliers within 10 days of the Contractor’s receipt of payment from the Owner, for undisputed services or supplies provided by the subcontractor or supplier. The provision shall also include the requirement that the Contractor shall pay interest of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month or any part of a month to the subcontractor or supplier on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor or supplier. The Page 305 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 28 provision shall further provide that the minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10, for an unpaid balance of less than $100, the Contractor shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor or supplier, and a subcontractor or supplier who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Contractor shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorneys’ fees, incurred in bringing the action. § 9.6.3 The Architect will, on request, furnish to a Subcontractor, if practicable, information regarding percentages of completion or amounts applied for by the Contractor and action taken thereon by the Architect and Owner on account of portions of the Work done by such Subcontractor. § 9.6.4 The Owner has the right to request written evidence from the Contractor that the Contractor has properly paid Subcontractors and suppliers amounts paid by the Owner to the Contractor for subcontracted Work. If the Contractor fails to furnish such evidence within seven days, the Owner shall have the right to contact Subcontractors and suppliers to ascertain whether they have been properly paid. Neither the Owner nor Architect shall have an obligation to pay, or to see to the payment of money to, a Subcontractor or supplier, except as may otherwise be required by law. § 9.6.5 The Contractor’s payments to suppliers shall be treated in a manner similar to that provided in Sections 9.6.2, 9.6.3 and 9.6.4. § 9.6.6 A Certificate for Payment, a progress payment, or partial or entire use or occupancy of the Project by the Owner shall not constitute acceptance of Work not in accordance with the Contract Documents. § 9.6.7 Unless the Contractor provides the Owner with a payment bond in the full penal sum of the Contract Sum, payments received by the Contractor for Work properly performed by Subcontractors or provided by suppliers shall be held by the Contractor for those Subcontractors or suppliers who performed Work or furnished materials, or both, under contract with the Contractor for which payment was made by the Owner. Nothing contained herein shall require money to be placed in a separate account and not commingled with money of the Contractor, create any fiduciary liability or tort liability on the part of the Contractor for breach of trust, or entitle any person or entity to an award of punitive damages against the Contractor for breach of the requirements of this provision. § 9.6.8 Provided the Owner has fulfilled its payment obligations under the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall defend and indemnify the Owner from all loss, liability, damage or expense, including reasonable attorney’s fees and litigation expenses, arising out of any lien claim or other claim for payment by any Subcontractor or supplier of any tier. Upon receipt of notice of a lien claim or other claim for payment, the Owner shall notify the Contractor. If approved by the applicable court, when required, the Contractor may substitute a surety bond for the property against which the lien or other claim for payment has been asserted. § 9.7 Failure of Payment If the Architect does not issue a Certificate for Payment, through no fault of the Contractor, within seven days after receipt of the Contractor’s Application for Payment, or if the Owner does not pay the Contractor within seven days after the date established in the Contract Documents, the amount certified by the Architect , then the Contractor may, upon seven additional days’ notice to the Owner and Architect, stop the Work until payment of the amount owing has been received. The Contract Time shall be extended appropriately and the Contract Sum shall be increased by the amount of the Contractor’s reasonable costs of shutdown, delay and start-up, plus interest as provided for in the Contract Documents. § 9.8 Substantial Completion § 9.8.1 Substantial Completion is the stage in the progress of the Work when the Work or designated portion thereof is sufficiently complete in accordance with the Contract Documents so that the Owner can occupy or utilize the Work for its intended use. § 9.8.2 When the Contractor considers that the Work, or a portion thereof which the Owner agrees to accept separately, is substantially complete, the Contractor shall prepare and submit to the Architect a comprehensive list of items to be completed or corrected prior to final payment. Failure to include an item on such list does not alter the responsibility of the Contractor to complete all Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. Page 306 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 29 § 9.8.3 Upon receipt of the Contractor’s list, the Architect will make an inspection to determine whether the Work or designated portion thereof is substantially complete. If the Architect’s inspection discloses any item, whether or not included on the Contractor’s list, which is not sufficiently complete in accordance with the Contract Documents so that the Owner can occupy or utilize the Work or designated portion thereof for its intended use, the Contractor shall, before issuance of the Certificate of Substantial Completion, complete or correct such item upon notification by the Architect. In such case, the Contractor shall then submit a request for another inspection by the Architect to determine Substantial Completion. § 9.8.4 When the Work or designated portion thereof is substantially complete, the Architect will prepare a Certificate of Substantial Completion that shall establish the date of Substantial Completion; establish responsibilities of the Owner and Contractor for security, maintenance, heat, utilities, damage to the Work and insurance; and fix the time within which the Contractor shall finish all items on the list accompanying the Certificate. Warranties required by the Contract Documents shall commence on the date of Substantial Completion of the Work or designated portion thereof unless otherwise provided in the Certificate of Substantial Completion. § 9.8.5 The Certificate of Substantial Completion shall be submitted to the Owner and Contractor for their written acceptance of responsibilities assigned to them in the Certificate. Upon such acceptance, and consent of surety if any, the Owner shall make payment of retainage applying to the Work or designated portion thereof. Such payment shall be adjusted for Work that is incomplete or not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. § 9.9 Partial Occupancy or Use § 9.9.1 The Owner may occupy or use any completed or partially completed portion of the Work at any stage when such portion is designated by separate agreement with the Contractor, provided such occupancy or use is consented to by the insurer and authorized by public authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. Such partial occupancy or use may commence whether or not the portion is substantially complete, provided the Owner and Contractor have accepted in writing the responsibilities assigned to each of them for payments, retainage, if any, security, maintenance, heat, utilities, damage to the Work and insurance, and have agreed in writing concerning the period for correction of the Work and commencement of warranties required by the Contract Documents. When the Contractor considers a portion substantially complete, the Contractor shall prepare and submit a list to the Architect as provided under Section 9.8.2. Consent of the Contractor to partial occupancy or use shall not be unreasonably withheld. The stage of the progress of the Work shall be determined by written agreement between the Owner and Contractor or, if no agreement is reached, by decision of the Architect. § 9.9.2 Immediately prior to such partial occupancy or use, the Owner, Contractor, and Architect shall jointly inspect the area to be occupied or portion of the Work to be used in order to determine and record the condition of the Work. § 9.9.3 Unless otherwise agreed upon, partial occupancy or use of a portion or portions of the Work shall not constitute acceptance of Work not complying with the requirements of the Contract Documents. § 9.10 Final Completion and Final Payment § 9.10.1 Upon receipt of the Contractor’s notice that the Work is ready for final inspection and acceptance and upon receipt of a final Application for Payment, the Architect will promptly make such inspection. When the Architect finds the Work acceptable under the Contract Documents and the Contract fully performed, the Architect will promptly issue a final Certificate for Payment stating that to the best of the Architect’s knowledge, information and belief, and on the basis of the Architect’s on-site visits and inspections, the Work has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents and that the entire balance found to be due the Contractor and noted in the final Certificate is due and payable. The Architect’s final Certificate for Payment will constitute a further representation that conditions listed in Section 9.10.2 as precedent to the Contractor’s being entitled to final payment have been fulfilled. § 9.10.2 Neither final payment nor any remaining retained percentage shall become due until the Contractor submits to the Architect (1) an affidavit that payrolls, bills for materials and equipment, and other indebtedness connected with the Work for which the Owner or the Owner’s property might be responsible or encumbered (less amounts withheld by Owner) have been paid or otherwise satisfied, (2) a certificate evidencing that insurance required by the Contract Documents to remain in force after final payment is currently in effect, (3) a written statement that the Contractor knows of no reason that the insurance will not be renewable to cover the period required by the Contract Documents, (4) consent of surety, if any, to final payment, (5) documentation of any special warranties, such as manufacturers’ warranties or specific Subcontractor warranties, and (6) if required by the Owner, other data establishing payment or Page 307 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 30 satisfaction of obligations, such as receipts and releases and waivers of liens, claims, security interests, or encumbrances arising out of the Contract, to the extent and in such form as may be designated by the Owner. If a Subcontractor refuses to furnish a release or waiver required by the Owner, the Contractor may furnish a bond satisfactory to the Owner to indemnify the Owner against such lien, claim, security interest, or encumbrance. If a lien, claim, security interest, or encumbrance remains unsatisfied after payments are made, the Contractor shall refund to the Owner all money that the Owner may be compelled to pay in discharging the lien, claim, security interest, or encumbrance, including all costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. § 9.10.3 If, after Substantial Completion of the Work, final completion thereof is materially delayed through no fault of the Contractor or by issuance of Change Orders affecting final completion, and the Architect so confirms, the Owner shall, upon application by the Contractor and certification by the Architect, and without terminating the Contract, make payment of the balance due for that portion of the Work fully completed, corrected, and accepted. If the remaining balance for Work not fully completed or corrected is less than retainage stipulated in the Contract Documents, and if bonds have been furnished, the written consent of the surety to payment of the balance due for that portion of the Work fully completed and accepted shall be submitted by the Contractor to the Architect prior to certification of such payment. Such payment shall be made under terms and conditions governing final payment, except that it shall not constitute a waiver of Claims. (Paragraphs deleted) § 9.10.5 Acceptance of final payment by the Contractor, a Subcontractor, or a supplier, shall constitute a waiver of claims by that payee except those previously made in writing and identified by that payee as unsettled at the time of final Application for Payment. ARTICLE 10 PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY § 10.1 Safety Precautions and Programs The Contractor shall be responsible for initiating, maintaining, and supervising all safety precautions and programs in connection with the performance of the Contract. § 10.2 Safety of Persons and Property § 10.2.1 The Contractor shall take reasonable precautions for safety of, and shall provide reasonable protection to prevent damage, injury, or loss to .1 employees on the Work and other persons who may be affected thereby; .2 the Work and materials and equipment to be incorporated therein, whether in storage on or off the site, under care, custody, or control of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, or a Sub-subcontractor; and .3 other property at the site or adjacent thereto, such as trees, shrubs, lawns, walks, pavements, roadways, structures, and utilities not designated for removal, relocation, or replacement in the course of construction. § 10.2.2 The Contractor shall comply with, and give notices required by applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations, and lawful orders of public authorities, bearing on safety of persons or property or their protection from damage, injury, or loss. § 10.2.3 The Contractor shall implement, erect, and maintain, as required by existing conditions and performance of the Contract, reasonable safeguards for safety and protection, including posting danger signs and other warnings against hazards; promulgating safety regulations; and notifying the owners and users of adjacent sites and utilities of the safeguards. § 10.2.4 When use or storage of explosives or other hazardous materials or equipment, or unusual methods are necessary for execution of the Work, the Contractor shall exercise utmost care and carry on such activities under supervision of properly qualified personnel. § 10.2.5 The Contractor shall promptly remedy damage and loss (other than damage or loss insured under property insurance required by the Contract Documents) to property referred to in Sections 10.2.1.2 and 10.2.1.3 caused in whole or in part by the Contractor, a Subcontractor, a Sub-subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or by anyone for whose acts they may be liable and for which the Contractor is responsible under Sections 10.2.1.2 and 10.2.1.3. The Contractor may make a Claim for the cost to remedy the damage or loss to the Page 308 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 31 extent such damage or loss is attributable to acts or omissions of the Owner or Architect or anyone directly or indirectly employed by either of them, or by anyone for whose acts either of them may be liable, and not attributable to the fault or negligence of the Contractor. The foregoing obligations of the Contractor are in addition to the Contractor’s obligations under Section 3.18. § 10.2.6 The Contractor shall designate a responsible member of the Contractor’s organization at the site whose duty shall be the prevention of accidents. This person shall be the Contractor’s superintendent unless otherwise designated by the Contractor in writing to the Owner and Architect. § 10.2.7 The Contractor shall not permit any part of the construction or site to be loaded so as to cause damage or create an unsafe condition. § 10.2.8 Injury or Damage to Person or Property If either party suffers injury or damage to person or property because of an act or omission of the other party, or of others for whose acts such party is legally responsible, notice of the injury or damage, whether or not insured, shall be given to the other party within a reasonable time not exceeding 21 days after discovery. The notice shall provide sufficient detail to enable the other party to investigate the matter. § 10.3 Hazardous Materials and Substances § 10.3.1 The Contractor is responsible for compliance with any requirements included in the Contract Documents regarding hazardous materials or substances. If the Contractor encounters a hazardous material or substance not addressed in the Contract Documents and if reasonable precautions will be inadequate to prevent foreseeable bodily injury or death to persons resulting from a material or substance, including but not limited to asbestos or polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), encountered on the site by the Contractor, the Contractor shall, upon recognizing the condition, immediately stop Work in the affected area and notify the Owner and Architect of the condition. § 10.3.2 Upon receipt of the Contractor’s notice, the Owner shall obtain the services of a licensed laboratory to verify the presence or absence of the material or substance reported by the Contractor and, in the event such material or substance is found to be present, to cause it to be rendered harmless. Unless otherwise required by the Contract Documents, the Owner shall furnish in writing to the Contractor and Architect the names and qualifications of persons or entities who are to perform tests verifying the presence or absence of the material or substance or who are to perform the task of removal or safe containment of the material or substance. The Contractor and the Architect will promptly reply to the Owner in writing stating whether or not either has reasonable objection to the persons or entities proposed by the Owner. If either the Contractor or Architect has an objection to a person or entity proposed by the Owner, the Owner shall propose another to whom the Contractor and the Architect have no reasonable objection. When the material or substance has been rendered harmless, Work in the affected area shall resume upon written agreement of the Owner and Contractor. By Change Order, the Contract Time shall be extended appropriately and the Contract Sum shall be increased by the amount of the Contractor’s reasonable additional costs of shutdown, delay, and start-up. § 10.3.3 To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless the Contractor, Subcontractors, Architect, Architect’s consultants, and agents and employees of any of them from and against claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from performance of the Work in the affected area if in fact the material or substance presents the risk of bodily injury or death as described in Section 10.3.1 and has not been rendered harmless, provided that such claim, damage, loss, or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease or death, or to injury to or destruction of tangible property (other than the Work itself), except to the extent that such damage, loss, or expense is due to the fault or negligence of the party seeking indemnity. § 10.3.4 The Owner shall not be responsible under this Section 10.3 for hazardous materials or substances the Contractor brings to the site unless such materials or substances are required by the Contract Documents. The Owner shall be responsible for hazardous materials or substances required by the Contract Documents, except to the extent of the Contractor’s fault or negligence in the use and handling of such materials or substances. § 10.3.5 The Contractor shall reimburse the Owner for the cost and expense the Owner incurs (1) for remediation of hazardous materials or substances the Contractor brings to the site and negligently handles, or (2) where the Page 309 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 32 Contractor fails to perform its obligations under Section 10.3.1, except to the extent that the cost and expense are due to the Owner’s fault or negligence. § 10.3.6 If, without negligence on the part of the Contractor, the Contractor is held liable by a government agency for the cost of remediation of a hazardous material or substance solely by reason of performing Work as required by the Contract Documents, the Owner shall reimburse the Contractor for all cost and expense thereby incurred. § 10.4 Emergencies In an emergency affecting safety of persons or property, the Contractor shall act, at the Contractor’s discretion, to prevent threatened damage, injury, or loss. Additional compensation or extension of time claimed by the Contractor on account of an emergency shall be determined as provided in Article 15 and Article 7. ARTICLE 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS § 11.1 Contractor’s Insurance and Bonds § 11.1.1 Contractor’s Liability Insurance. The Contractor shall purchase and maintain commercial general liability insurance as required to protect the Contractor, Architect and Owner from claims set forth below which may arise out of, result from, or are in any manner connected with, the execution of the work provided for in this Contract, or occur or result from the use by the Contractor, its agents or employees, of materials, equipment, instrumentalities or other property, whether the same be owned by the Contractor, or third parties, whether such claims arise during Contract performance or subsequent to completion of operations under this Contract and whether operations be by the Contractor or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by Contractor, or by anyone for whose acts Contractor may be liable, and whether such claims are claims for which the Contractor may be, or may be claimed to be, liable. Insurance shall be purchased from a company licensed to do business in the state where the Project is located, and shall be written for not less than the limits of liability specified below or required by law, whichever is greater. A certificate of insurance on a form acceptable to the Owner which verifies the existence of this insurance coverage must be provided to the Owner before work under this contract is begun. The Owner shall be named as an additional insured on a primary and noncontributory basis. The types of claims, required coverages and minimum limits of liability are as follows: A. Claims under Worker’s Compensation, disability benefit and other similar employee benefit acts; claims for damages because of bodily injury, occupational sickness or disease or death of employees. Insurance coverages shall include: Statutory Workers’ Compensation, including Employer’s Liability with a minimum limit of $100,000.00 for each employee. B. Claims for damages because of bodily injury, occupational sickness or disease, or death, by any person other than employees, claims for personal injuries which are sustained (1) by any person as a result of an act or omission directly or indirectly related to the employment of such person by the Contractor, or (2) any other person; claims for damages other than to the Work itself, because of injury to or destruction of tangible property including loss of use resulting therefor. Insurance coverages shall include: Premise – Operations Products-Completed Operations Blanket Contractual – Such insurance and endorsements as will insure the obligations under the provisions of Subsection 11.1.5 of this Document. Broad Form Property Damage Personal Injury Blanket Explosion, Collapse and Underground Property Damage Operations of Independent Contractors Policy Limits: General Aggregate $2,000,000.00 Products/Completed Operations Aggregate $1,000,000.00 Personal Injury $1,000,000.00 Each Occurrence $1,000,000.00 C. Claims for damages because of bodily injury or death of any person, or any property damage arising out of the ownership or use of any motor vehicle. Insurance coverage shall include: Page 310 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 33 Business Auto Liability insurance including owned, hired and non-owned vehicles with limits of $1,000,000.00 Combined Single Limit for each accident for bodily injury and death, or property damage. D. The coverage limits required by Paragraphs (B) and (C) above may be achieved by the use of an Umbrella Excess Liability Policy. The limits of liability specified shall be considered minimum requirements. All aforesaid insurance policies shall be underwritten with responsible insurance carriers, with Best’s Ratings of not less than A and X and otherwise satisfactory to Owner and licensed to provide insurance in the state in which the Project is located. . § 11.1.2 The Contractor shall provide surety bonds of the types, for such penal sums, and subject to such terms and conditions as required by the Contract Documents. The Contractor shall purchase and maintain the required bonds from a company or companies lawfully authorized to issue surety bonds in the jurisdiction where the Project is located. § 11.1.3 Upon the request of any person or entity appearing to be a potential beneficiary of bonds covering payment of obligations arising under the Contract, the Contractor shall promptly furnish a copy of the bonds or shall authorize a copy to be furnished. § 11.1.4 Notice of Cancellation or Expiration of Contractor’s Required Insurance. Within three (3) business days of the date the Contractor becomes aware of an impending or actual cancellation or expiration of any insurance required by the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall provide notice to the Owner of such impending or actual cancellation or expiration. Upon receipt of notice from the Contractor, the Owner shall, unless the lapse in coverage arises from an act or omission of the Owner, have the right to stop the Work until the lapse in coverage has been cured by the procurement of replacement coverage by the Contractor. The furnishing of notice by the Contractor shall not relieve the Contractor of any contractual obligation to provide any required coverage. § 11.2 Owner’s Insurance § 11.2.1 The Owner shall purchase and maintain insurance of the types and limits of liability, containing the endorsements, and subject to the terms and conditions, as described in the Agreement or elsewhere in the Contract Documents. The Owner shall purchase and maintain the required insurance from an insurance company or insurance companies lawfully authorized to issue insurance in the jurisdiction where the Project is located. § 11.2.2 Failure to Purchase Required Property Insurance. If the Owner fails to purchase and maintain the required property insurance, with all of the coverages and in the amounts described in the Agreement or elsewhere in the Contract Documents, the Owner shall inform the Contractor in writing prior to commencement of the Work. Upon receipt of notice from the Owner, the Contractor may delay commencement of the Work and may obtain insurance that will protect the interests of the Contractor, Subcontractors, and Sub-Subcontractors in the Work. When the failure to provide coverage has been cured or resolved, the Contract Sum and Contract Time shall be equitably adjusted. In the event the Owner fails to procure coverage, the Owner waives all rights against the Contractor, Subcontractors, and Sub-subcontractors to the extent the loss to the Owner would have been covered by the insurance to have been procured by the Owner. The cost of the insurance shall be charged to the Owner by a Change Order. If the Owner does not provide written notice, and the Contractor is damaged by the failure or neglect of the Owner to purchase or maintain the required insurance, the Owner shall reimburse the Contractor for all reasonable costs and damages attributable thereto. § 11.2.3 Notice of Cancellation or Expiration of Owner’s Required Property Insurance. Within three (3) business days of the date the Owner becomes aware of an impending or actual cancellation or expiration of any property insurance required by the Contract Documents, the Owner shall provide notice to the Contractor of such impending or actual cancellation or expiration. Unless the lapse in coverage arises from an act or omission of the Contractor: (1) the Contractor, upon receipt of notice from the Owner, shall have the right to stop the Work until the lapse in coverage has been cured by the procurement of replacement coverage by either the Owner or the Contractor; (2) the Contract Time and Contract Sum shall be equitably adjusted; and (3) the Owner waives all rights against the Contractor, Subcontractors, and Sub-subcontractors to the extent any loss to the Owner would have been covered by the insurance had it not expired or been cancelled. If the Contractor purchases replacement coverage, the cost of the insurance shall Page 311 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 34 be charged to the Owner by an appropriate Change Order. The furnishing of notice by the Owner shall not relieve the Owner of any contractual obligation to provide required insurance. § 11.3 Waivers of Subrogation (Paragraphs deleted) § 11.4 Loss of Use, Business Interruption, and Delay in Completion Insurance The Owner, at the Owner’s option, may purchase and maintain insurance as will insure the Owner against loss of use of the Owner’s property due to fire or other hazards, however caused. §11.5 Adjustment and Settlement of Insured Loss § 11.5.1 A loss insured under the property insurance required by the Agreement shall be adjusted by the Owner as fiduciary and made payable to the Owner as fiduciary for the insureds, as their interests may appear, subject to requirements of any applicable mortgagee clause and of Section 11.5.2. The Owner shall pay the Architect and Contractor their just shares of insurance proceeds received by the Owner, and by appropriate agreements the Architect and Contractor shall make payments to their consultants and Subcontractors in similar manner. § 11.5.2 Prior to settlement of an insured loss, the Owner shall notify the Contractor of the terms of the proposed settlement as well as the proposed allocation of the insurance proceeds. The Contractor shall have 14 days from receipt of notice to object to the proposed settlement or allocation of the proceeds. If the Contractor does not object, the Owner shall settle the loss and the Contractor shall be bound by the settlement and allocation. Upon receipt, the Owner shall deposit the insurance proceeds in a separate account and make the appropriate distributions. Thereafter, if no other agreement is made or the Owner does not terminate the Contract for convenience, the Owner and Contractor shall execute a Change Order for reconstruction of the damaged or destroyed Work in the amount allocated for that purpose. If the Contractor timely objects to either the terms of the proposed settlement or the allocation of the proceeds, the Owner may proceed to settle the insured loss, and any dispute between the Owner and Contractor arising out of the settlement or allocation of the proceeds shall be resolved pursuant to Article 15. Pending resolution of any dispute, the Owner may issue a Construction Change Directive for the reconstruction of the damaged or destroyed Work. ARTICLE 12 UNCOVERING AND CORRECTION OF WORK § 12.1 Uncovering of Work § 12.1.1 If a portion of the Work is covered contrary to the Architect’s request or to requirements specifically expressed in the Contract Documents, it must, if requested in writing by the Architect, be uncovered for the Architect’s examination and be replaced at the Contractor’s expense without change in the Contract Time. § 12.1.2 If a portion of the Work has been covered that the Architect has not specifically requested to examine prior to its being covered, the Architect may request to see such Work and it shall be uncovered by the Contractor. If such Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall be entitled to an equitable adjustment to the Contract Sum and Contract Time as may be appropriate. If such Work is not in accordance with the Contract Documents, the costs of uncovering the Work, and the cost of correction, shall be at the Contractor’s expense. § 12.2 Correction of Work § 12.2.1 Before Substantial Completion The Contractor shall promptly correct Work rejected by the Architect or failing to conform to the requirements of the Contract Documents, discovered before Substantial Completion and whether or not fabricated, installed or completed. Costs of correcting such rejected Work, including additional testing and inspections, the cost of uncovering and replacement, and compensation for the Architect’s services and expenses made necessary thereby, shall be at the Contractor’s expense. § 12.2.2 After Substantial Completion § 12.2.2.1 In addition to the Contractor’s obligations under Section 3.5, if, within one year after the date of Substantial Completion of the Work or designated portion thereof or after the date for commencement of warranties established under Section 9.9.1, or by terms of any applicable special warranty required by the Contract Documents, any of the Work is found to be not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall correct it promptly after receipt of notice from the Owner to do so, unless the Owner has previously given the Contractor a written acceptance of such condition. The Owner shall give such notice promptly after discovery of the condition. Page 312 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 35 During the one-year period for correction of Work, if the Owner fails to notify the Contractor and give the Contractor an opportunity to make the correction, the Owner waives the rights to require correction by the Contractor and to make a claim for breach of warranty. If the Contractor fails to correct nonconforming Work within a reasonable time during that period after receipt of notice from the Owner or Architect, the Owner may correct it in accordance with Section 2.5. Contractor warrants their labor for the first year. Owner shall rely exclusives upon warranties provided by supplier of all products sold. Owner shall inspect products within seven (7) days of delivery of the products to the Project site. Owner will be deemed to have accepted the Products unless it notifies Contractor in writing of any nonconforming products during the seven (7) day inspection period and furnishes written evidence or other documents. § 12.2.2.2 The one-year period for correction of Work shall be extended with respect to portions of Work first performed after Substantial Completion by the period of time between Substantial Completion and the actual completion of that portion of the Work. § 12.2.2.3 The one-year period for correction of Work shall not be extended by corrective Work performed by the Contractor pursuant to this Section 12.2. § 12.2.3 The Contractor shall remove from the site portions of the Work that are not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents and are neither corrected by the Contractor nor accepted by the Owner. § 12.2.4 The Contractor shall bear the cost of correcting destroyed or damaged construction of the Owner or Separate Contractors, whether completed or partially completed, caused by the Contractor’s correction or removal of Work that is not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. § 12.2.5 Nothing contained in this Section 12.2 shall be construed to establish a period of limitation with respect to other obligations the Contractor has under the Contract Documents. Establishment of the one-year period for correction of Work as described in Section 12.2.2 relates only to the specific obligation of the Contractor to correct the Work, and has no relationship to the time within which the obligation to comply with the Contract Documents may be sought to be enforced, nor to the time within which proceedings may be commenced to establish the Contractor’s liability with respect to the Contractor’s obligations other than specifically to correct the Work. § 12.3 Acceptance of Nonconforming Work If the Owner prefers to accept Work that is not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents, the Owner may do so instead of requiring its removal and correction, in which case the Contract Sum will be reduced as appropriate and equitable. Such adjustment shall be effected whether or not final payment has been made. ARTICLE 13 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS § 13.1 Governing Law The Contract shall be governed by the law of the place where the Project is located. § 13.2 Successors and Assigns § 13.2.1 The Owner and Contractor respectively bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to covenants, agreements, and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. Except as provided in Section 13.2.2, neither party to the Contract shall assign the Contract as a whole without written consent of the other. If either party attempts to make an assignment without such consent, that party shall nevertheless remain legally responsible for all obligations under the Contract. § 13.2.2 The Owner may, without consent of the Contractor, assign the Contract to a lender providing construction financing for the Project, if the lender assumes the Owner’s rights and obligations under the Contract Documents. The Contractor shall execute all consents reasonably required to facilitate the assignment. § 13.3 Rights and Remedies § 13.3.1 Duties and obligations imposed by the Contract Documents and rights and remedies available thereunder shall be in addition to and not a limitation of duties, obligations, rights, and remedies otherwise imposed or available by law. Page 313 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 36 § 13.3.2 No action or failure to act by the Owner, Architect, or Contractor shall constitute a waiver of a right or duty afforded them under the Contract, nor shall such action or failure to act constitute approval of or acquiescence in a breach thereunder, except as may be specifically agreed upon in writing. § 13.4 Tests and Inspections § 13.4.1 Tests, inspections, and approvals of portions of the Work shall be made as required by the Contract Documents and by applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules, and regulations or lawful orders of public authorities. Unless otherwise provided, the Contractor shall make arrangements for such tests, inspections, and approvals with an independent testing laboratory or entity acceptable to the Owner, or with the appropriate public authority, and shall bear all related costs of tests, inspections, and approvals. The Contractor shall give the Architect timely notice of when and where tests and inspections are to be made so that the Architect may be present for such procedures. The Owner shall bear costs of tests, inspections, or approvals that do not become requirements until after bids are received or negotiations concluded. The Owner shall directly arrange and pay for tests, inspections, or approvals where building codes or applicable laws or regulations so require. § 13.4.2 If the Architect, Owner, or public authorities having jurisdiction determine that portions of the Work require additional testing, inspection, or approval not included under Section 13.4.1, the Architect will, upon written authorization from the Owner, instruct the Contractor to make arrangements for such additional testing, inspection, or approval, by an entity acceptable to the Owner, and the Contractor shall give timely notice to the Architect of when and where tests and inspections are to be made so that the Architect may be present for such procedures. Such costs, except as provided in Section 13.4.3, shall be at the Owner’s expense. § 13.4.3 If procedures for testing, inspection, or approval under Sections 13.4.1 and 13.4.2 reveal failure of the portions of the Work to comply with requirements established by the Contract Documents, all costs made necessary by such failure, including those of repeated procedures and compensation for the Architect’s services and expenses, shall be at the Contractor’s expense. § 13.4.4 Required certificates of testing, inspection, or approval shall, unless otherwise required by the Contract Documents, be secured by the Contractor and promptly delivered to the Architect. § 13.4.5 If the Architect is to observe tests, inspections, or approvals required by the Contract Documents, the Architect will do so promptly and, where practicable, at the normal place of testing. § 13.4.6 Tests or inspections conducted pursuant to the Contract Documents shall be made promptly to avoid unreasonable delay in the Work. § 13.5 Interest Payments due and unpaid under the Contract Documents shall bear interest from the date payment is due at the rate the parties agree upon in writing or, in the absence thereof, at the legal rate prevailing from time to time at the place where the Project is located. ARTICLE 14 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE CONTRACT § 14.1 Termination by the Contractor (Paragraphs deleted) § 14.1.4 If the Work is stopped for a period of 60 consecutive days through no act or fault of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, a Sub-subcontractor, or their agents or employees or any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work because the Owner has repeatedly failed to fulfill the Owner’s obligations under the Contract Documents with respect to matters important to the progress of the Work, the Contractor may, upon seven additional days’ notice to the Owner and the Architect, terminate the Contract and recover from the Owner as provided in Section 14.1.3. § 14.2 Termination by the Owner for Cause § 14.2.1 The Owner may terminate the Contract if the Contractor .1 repeatedly refuses or fails to supply enough properly skilled workers or proper materials; .2 fails to make payment to Subcontractors or suppliers in accordance with the respective agreements between the Contractor and the Subcontractors or suppliers; Page 314 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 37 .3 repeatedly disregards applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations, or lawful orders of a public authority; or .4 otherwise is guilty of substantial breach of a provision of the Contract Documents. § 14.2.2 When any of the reasons described in Section 14.2.1 exist, and upon certification by the Architect that sufficient cause exists to justify such action, the Owner may, without prejudice to any other rights or remedies of the Owner and after giving the Contractor and the Contractor’s surety, if any, seven days’ notice, terminate employment of the Contractor and may, subject to any prior rights of the surety: .1 Exclude the Contractor from the site and take possession of all materials, equipment, tools, and construction equipment and machinery thereon owned by the Contractor; .2 Accept assignment of subcontracts pursuant to Section 5.4; and .3 Finish the Work by whatever reasonable method the Owner may deem expedient. Upon written request of the Contractor, the Owner shall furnish to the Contractor a detailed accounting of the costs incurred by the Owner in finishing the Work. § 14.2.3 When the Owner terminates the Contract for one of the reasons stated in Section 14.2.1, the Contractor shall not be entitled to receive further payment until the Work is finished. § 14.2.4 If the unpaid balance of the Contract Sum exceeds costs of finishing the Work, including compensation for the Architect’s services and expenses made necessary thereby, and other damages incurred by the Owner and not expressly waived, such excess shall be paid to the Contractor. If such costs and damages exceed the unpaid balance, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the Owner. The amount to be paid to the Contractor or Owner, as the case may be, shall be certified by the Initial Decision Maker, upon application, and this obligation for payment shall survive termination of the Contract. § 14.3 Suspension by the Owner for Convenience § 14.3.1 The Owner may, without cause, order the Contractor in writing to suspend, delay or interrupt the Work, in whole or in part for such period of time as the Owner may determine. § 14.3.2 The Contract Sum and Contract Time shall be adjusted for increases in the cost and time caused by suspension, delay, or interruption under Section 14.3.1. Adjustment of the Contract Sum shall include profit. No adjustment shall be made to the extent .1 that performance is, was, or would have been, so suspended, delayed, or interrupted, by another cause for which the Contractor is responsible; or .2 that an equitable adjustment is made or denied under another provision of the Contract. § 14.4 Termination by the Owner for Convenience § 14.4.1 The Owner may, at any time, terminate the Contract for the Owner’s convenience and without cause. § 14.4.2 Upon receipt of notice from the Owner of such termination for the Owner’s convenience, the Contractor shall .1 cease operations as directed by the Owner in the notice; .2 take actions necessary, or that the Owner may direct, for the protection and preservation of the Work; and .3 except for Work directed to be performed prior to the effective date of termination stated in the notice, terminate all existing subcontracts and purchase orders and enter into no further subcontracts and purchase orders. § 14.4.3 In case of such termination for the Owner’s convenience, the Contractor shall be entitled to payment for Work executedalong with reasonable overhead and profit for the completed Work. ARTICLE 15 CLAIMS AND DISPUTES § 15.1 Claims § 15.1.1 Definition A Claim is a demand or assertion by one of the parties seeking, as a matter of right, payment of money, a change in the Contract Time, or other relief with respect to the terms of the Contract. The term "Claim" also includes other disputes and matters in question between the Owner and Contractor arising out of or relating to the Contract. The responsibility Page 315 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 38 to substantiate Claims shall rest with the party making the Claim. This Section 15.1.1 does not require the Owner to file a Claim in order to impose liquidated damages in accordance with the Contract Documents. § 15.1.2 Time Limits on Claims The Owner and Contractor shall commence all Claims and causes of action against the other and arising out of or related to the Contract, whether in contract, tort, breach of warranty or otherwise, in accordance with the requirements of the binding dispute resolution method selected in the Agreement and within the period specified by applicable law, but in any case not more than 10 years after the date of Substantial Completion of the Work. The Owner and Contractor waive all Claims and causes of action not commenced in accordance with this Section 15.1.2. § 15.1.3 Notice of Claims § 15.1.3.1 Claims by either the Owner or Contractor, where the condition giving rise to the Claim is first discovered prior to expiration of the period for correction of the Work set forth in Section 12.2.2, shall be initiated by notice to the other party and to the Initial Decision Maker with a copy sent to the Architect, if the Architect is not serving as the Initial Decision Maker. Claims by either party under this Section 15.1.3.1 shall be initiated within 21 days after occurrence of the event giving rise to such Claim or within 21 days after the claimant first recognizes the condition giving rise to the Claim, whichever is later. § 15.1.3.2 Claims by either the Owner or Contractor, where the condition giving rise to the Claim is first discovered after expiration of the period for correction of the Work set forth in Section 12.2.2, shall be initiated by notice to the other party. In such event, no decision by the Initial Decision Maker is required. § 15.1.4 Continuing Contract Performance § 15.1.4.1 Pending final resolution of a Claim, except as otherwise agreed in writing or as provided in Section 9.7 and Article 14, the Contractor shall proceed diligently with performance of the Contract and the Owner shall continue to make payments in accordance with the Contract Documents. § 15.1.4.2 The Contract Sum and Contract Time shall be adjusted in accordance with the Initial Decision Maker’s decision, subject to the right of either party to proceed in accordance with this Article 15. The Architect will issue Certificates for Payment in accordance with the decision of the Initial Decision Maker. § 15.1.5 Claims for Additional Cost If the Contractor wishes to make a Claim for an increase in the Contract Sum, notice as provided in Section 15.1.3 shall be given before proceeding to execute the portion of the Work that is the subject of the Claim. Prior notice is not required for Claims relating to an emergency endangering life or property arising under Section 10.4. § 15.1.6 Claims for Additional Time § 15.1.6.1 If the Contractor wishes to make a Claim for an increase in the Contract Time, notice as provided in Section 15.1.3 shall be given. The Contractor’s Claim shall include an estimate of cost and of probable effect of delay on progress of the Work. In the case of a continuing delay, only one Claim is necessary. § 15.1.6.2 If adverse weather conditions are the basis for a Claim for additional time, such Claim shall be documented by data substantiating that weather conditions were abnormal for the period of time, could not have been reasonably anticipated, and had an adverse effect on the scheduled construction. § 15.1.7 Waiver of Claims for Consequential Damages The Contractor and Owner waive Claims against each other for consequential damages arising out of or relating to this Contract. This mutual waiver includes .1 damages incurred by the Owner for rental expenses, for losses of use, income, profit, financing, business and reputation, and for loss of management or employee productivity or of the services of such persons; and .2 damages incurred by the Contractor for principal office expenses including the compensation of personnel stationed there, for losses of financing, business and reputation, and for loss of profit, except anticipated profit arising directly from the Work. Page 316 of 1086 Init. / AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 39 This mutual waiver is applicable, without limitation, to all consequential damages due to either party’s termination in accordance with Article 14. Nothing contained in this Section 15.1.7 shall be deemed to preclude assessment of liquidated damages, when applicable, in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. (Paragraphs deleted) Page 317 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA® Document A201® – 2017 This Additions and Deletions Report, as defined on page 1 of the associated document, reproduces below all text the author has added to the standard form AIA document in order to complete it, as well as any text the author may have added to or deleted from the original AIA text. Added text is shown underlined. Deleted text is indicated with a horizontal line through the original AIA text. Note: This Additions and Deletions Report is provided for information purposes only and is not incorporated into or constitute any part of the associated AIA document. This Additions and Deletions Report and its associated document were generated simultaneously by AIA software at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024. Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 1 PAGE 1 Edina Fire Station 2 4401 76th St W, Edina MN 55435 … City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 … Boarman Kroos Vogel Group, Inc. 222 North Second Street, Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 PAGE 10 § 1.2.1 The Contract Documents are to be read and interpreted as a whole. The intent of the Contract Documents is to include all items necessary for the proper execution and completion of the Work by the Contractor. The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is required by one shall be as binding as if required by all; performance by the Contractor shall be required only to the extent consistent with the Contract Documents and reasonably inferable from them as being necessary to produce the indicated results.and to require Contractor to provide the highest quality and greatest quantity consistent with the Contract Documents. If there are inconsistencies within or among part of the Contract Documents or between the Contract Documents and applicable standards, codes or ordinances, the Contractor shall provide the better quality or greater quantity of Work or comply with the more stringent requirements; either or all in accordance with the Architect’s interpretation. The terms and conditions of this subparagraph 1.2.1 shall not relieve the Contractor of any of its obligations as set forth in Article 3. .1 Before ordering any materials or doing any Work, the Contractor shall verify measurements at the Project site and shall be responsible for the correctness of such measurements. No extra charges or compensation will be allowed on account of differences between actual dimensions and the dimensions indicated on the Drawings. Any difference that may be found shall be submitted to the Architect for resolution before proceeding with the Work. .2 If a minor change in the Work is necessary due to actual field conditions, the Contractor shall submit detailed drawings of such departure to the Architect for approval by the Architect before making the change. The Owner shall not be required to make any adjustment to either the Contract Sum or Contract Time because of any failure by the Contractor to comply with the requirements of this Subparagraph 1.2.1. Actual or alleged conflicts or inconsistencies between the Drawings and Specifications or other Contract Documents shall be brought to the Page 318 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 2 Architect’s and Architect’s attention in writing, prior to performing the affected Work. The Architect’s and Construction Manager’s directions, as communicated through the Architect, shall be followed by the Contractor. PAGE 12 The parties shall agree upon written protocols governing the transmission and use of, and reliance on, of Instruments of Service or any other information or documentation in digital form. The parties will use AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, to establish the protocols for the development, use, transmission, and exchange of digital data. … Any use of, or reliance on, all or a portion of a building information model without agreement to written protocols governing the use of, and reliance on, the information contained in the model and without having those protocols set forth in AIA Document E203™–2013, Building Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit, and the requisite AIA Document G202™–2013, Project Building Information Modeling Protocol Form, shall be at the using or relying party’s sole risk and without liability to the other party and its contractors or consultants, the authors of, or contributors to, the building information model, and each of their agents and employees. … § 2.1.2 The Owner shall furnish to the Contractor, within fifteen days after receipt of a written request, information necessary and relevant for the Contractor to evaluate, give notice of, or enforce mechanic’s lien rights. Such information shall include a correct statement of the record legal title to the property on which the Project is located, usually referred to as the site, and the Owner’s interest therein.Work is to proceed as a no-lien Project in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota regarding public projects. Contractor shall provide to the Owner both a Labor and Material Payment Bond and a Performance Bond each in the amount of the Contract Price prior to the commencement of Work as required by Minnesota Statutes 574.26. The Contractor, for itself and for all who claim through the Contractor, acknowledges and agrees: (i) that because it is a public project, no lien shall attach to the real estate on which the Project is located or to any improvements no existing or to be constructed thereon in favor of the Contractor or any Subcontractor, mechanic, journeyman, laborer, material vendor, lessor of tools or equipment or any other party who may furnish work, materials, equipment, services, tools or machinery for the design or construction of improvements on the land. The Contractor shall also provide written notice of the no-lien status of this Project to all of its Subcontractors, material suppliers, equipment lessors and others that provide labor, material, equipment and/or services for the Project. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and Architect harmless from any suit, lien, damages, losses or expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees.. § 2.2 Evidence of the Owner’s Financial Arrangements § 2.2.1 Prior to commencement of the Work and upon written request by the Contractor, the Owner shall furnish to the Contractor reasonable evidence that the Owner has made financial arrangements to fulfill the Owner’s obligations under the Contract. The Contractor shall have no obligation to commence the Work until the Owner provides such evidence. If commencement of the Work is delayed under this Section 2.2.1, the Contract Time shall be extended appropriately. § 2.2.2 Following commencement of the Work and upon written request by the Contractor, the Owner shall furnish to the Contractor reasonable evidence that the Owner has made financial arrangements to fulfill the Owner’s obligations under the Contract only if (1) the Owner fails to make payments to the Contractor as the Contract Documents require; (2) the Contractor identifies in writing a reasonable concern regarding the Owner’s ability to make payment when due; or (3) a change in the Work materially changes the Contract Sum. If the Owner fails to provide such evidence, as required, within fourteen days of the Contractor’s request, the Contractor may immediately stop the Work and, in that event, shall notify the Owner that the Work has stopped. However, if the request is made because a change in the Work materially changes the Contract Sum under (3) above, the Contractor may immediately stop only that portion of the Work affected by the change until reasonable evidence is provided. If the Work is stopped under this Section 2.2.2, the Contract Time shall be extended appropriately and the Contract Sum shall be increased by the amount of the Contractor’s reasonable costs of shutdown, delay and start-up, plus interest as provided in the Contract Documents. § 2.2.3 After the Owner furnishes evidence of financial arrangements under this Section 2.2, the Owner shall not materially vary such financial arrangements without prior notice to the Contractor. Page 319 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 3 § 2.2.4 Where the Owner has designated information furnished under this Section 2.2 as "confidential," the Contractor shall keep the information confidential and shall not disclose it to any other person. However, the Contractor may disclose "confidential" information, after seven (7) days’ notice to the Owner, where disclosure is required by law, including a subpoena or other form of compulsory legal process issued by a court or governmental entity, or by court or arbitrator(s) order. The Contractor may also disclose "confidential" information to its employees, consultants, sureties, Subcontractors and their employees, Sub-subcontractors, and others who need to know the content of such information solely and exclusively for the Project and who agree to maintain the confidentiality of such information. PAGE 13 § 2.3.3 If the employment of the Architect terminates, the Owner shall employ a successor to whom the Contractor has no reasonable objection and whose status under the Contract Documents shall be that of the Architect. PAGE 15 § 3.5.1 The Contractor warrants to the Owner and Architect that materials and equipment furnished under the Contract will be of good quality and new unless the Contract Documents require or permit otherwise. The Contractor further warrants that the Work will conform to the requirements of the Contract Documents and will be free from defects, except for those inherent in the quality of the Work the Contract Documents require or permit. Work, materials, or equipment not conforming to these requirements may be considered defective. Contractor warrants their labor and installation for the first year, beginning day 1 after installation. Owner shall rely exclusives upon warranties provided by supplier of all products sold. The Contractor’s warranty excludes remedy for damage or defect caused by abuse, alterations to the Work not executed by the Contractor, improper or insufficient maintenance, improper operation, or normal wear and tear and normal usage. If required by the Architect, the Contractor shall furnish satisfactory evidence as to the kind and quality of materials and equipment. … If the Contractor encounters conditions at the site that are (1) subsurface or otherwise concealed physical conditions that differ materially from those indicated in the Contract Documents or (2) unknown physical conditions of an unusual nature that differ materially from those ordinarily found to exist and generally recognized as inherent in construction activities of the character provided for in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall promptly provide notice to the Owner and the Architect before conditions are disturbed and in no event later than 14 10 days after first observance of the conditions. The Architect will promptly investigate such conditions and, if the Architect determines that they differ materially and cause an increase or decrease in the Contractor’s cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the Work, will recommend that an equitable adjustment be made in the Contract Sum or Contract Time, or both. If the Architect determines that the conditions at the site are not materially different from those indicated in the Contract Documents and that no change in the terms of the Contract is justified, the Architect shall promptly notify the Owner and Contractor, stating the reasons. If either party disputes the Architect’s determination or recommendation, that party may submit a Claim as provided in Article 15.reasons PAGE 19 § 4.1.2 Duties, responsibilities, and limitations of authority of the Architect as set forth in the Contract Documents shall not be restricted, modified, or extended without written consent of the Owner, Contractor, and Architect. Consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Interpretations and decisions of the Architect will be consistent with the intent of, and reasonably inferable from, the Contract Documents and will be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and decisions, the Architect will endeavor to secure faithful performance by Contractor, and will not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions rendered in good faith. PAGE 20 § 4.2.13 The Architect’s Owner’s decisions on matters relating to aesthetic effect will be final if consistent with the intent expressed in the Contract Documents. PAGE 23 § 7.1.2 A Change Order shall be based upon agreement among the Owner, Contractor, and Architect. A Construction Change Directive requires agreement by the Owner and Architect and may or may not be agreed to by the Contractor. Page 320 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 4 Owner may request changes or modifications when needed however, these shall be treated as a non-binding request unless and until Owner, Contractor, and Architect have agreed in writing of the changes and any change in cost related to product, shipping, restocking fees, or other costs. An order for a minor change in the Work may be issued by the Architect alone. … Overhead and Profit (OH&P) for changes in work shall be limited to the following: 10% OH&P for all work self-preformed by Contractors own forces 5% OH&P for all subcontracted work. 5% OH&P for all work by subcontractors. Work performed by a combination of Contractors and Sub-Contractors shall not exceed a total of 10%OH&P PAGE 24 § 7.3.5 If the Contractor disagrees with the adjustment in the Contract Time, the Contractor may make a Claim in accordance with applicable provisions of Article 15. Contractor will not be held responsible for supplier’s failure to accept any changes. … § 7.3.9 Pending final determination of the total cost of a Construction Change Directive to the Owner, the Contractor may request payment for Work completed under the Construction Change Directive in Applications for Payment. The Architect will make an interim determination for purposes of monthly certification for payment for those costs and certify for payment the amount that the Architect determines, in the Architect’s professional judgment, to be reasonably justified. The Architect’s interim determination of cost shall adjust the Contract Sum on the same basis as a Change Order, subject to the right of either party to disagree and assert a Claim in accordance with Article 15.Change. PAGE 25 § 8.2.1 Time limits stated in the Contract Documents are of the essence of the Contract. By executing the Agreement, the Contractor confirms that the Contract Time is a reasonable period for performing the Work.Work Contractor will inform Owner of estimate date of delivery and install for products when Contractor receives an estimated shipping date from its supplier/product manufacturer. Owner agrees that the Estimated Delivery Date is an estimate, not a guarantee, and is subject to change. Lead times vary widely by manufacturer, series, finish, and Owner’s customer-own material (COM) fabric. Contractor shall not be liable for any delays in delivery and will take commercially reasonable steps to facilitate timely delivery or performance. … § 8.3.1 If the Contractor is delayed at any time in the commencement or progress of the Work by (1) or the sequencing of the work by an act or neglect of the Owner or Architect, of an employee of either, or of a Separate Contractor; (2) Contractor employed by the Owner, or by changes ordered in the Work; (3) by labor disputes, fire, Work or by fires, unusual delay in deliveries, unavoidable casualties, adverse weather conditions documented in accordance with Section 15.1.6.2, or other causes beyond the Contractor’s control; (4) by delay authorized by the Owner pending mediation and binding dispute resolution; or (5) by other causes that the Contractor asserts, and the Architect determines, or a Subcontractor’s or supplier’s controor other causes which the Architect determines may justify delay, then the Contract Time shall be extended by Change Order without notice to sureties, for such reasonable time as the Architect may determine. A time extension shall be Contractor’s sole remedy and compensation for all such delays and changes in sequencing. . § 8.3.2 Claims relating to time shall be made in accordance with applicable provisions of Article 15. Page 321 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 5 § 8.3.3 This Section 8.3 does not preclude precludes recovery of damages for delay by either party under other provisions of the Contract Documents.Contractor if the Contractor is delayed at any time in the progress of the Work or the sequencing of work by an act or neglect of the Owner or the Architect or of any employee of either or of a separate contractor employed by the Owner, or by changes ordered in the Work, or by fires, unusual delays in deliveries, unavoidable casualties or other causes beyond the Contractor’s or a Subcontractor’s or suppliers control and not reasonably anticipatable, or by other causes which the Architect determines may justify delay, then the Contract Time shall be extended by Change Order without notice to sureties, for such reasonable time as the Architect may determine. A time extension shall be the Contractor’s sole remedy and compensation for all such delays and changes in sequencing. . PAGE 26 § 9.3.1.2 Applications for Payment shall not include requests for payment for portions of the Work for which the Contractor does not intend to pay a Subcontractor or supplier, unless such Work has been performed by others whom the Contractor intends to pay.Owner shall make 95% progress payments on account of the Contract Price on the basis of Contractor’s Applications for Payment during performance of the Work. Upon final completion of the Work, Owner shall pay the remainder of the Contract Price. Minn. Stat. § 290.92 requires that the City of Edina obtain a Withholding Affidavit for Contractors, Form IC-134, before making final payments to Contractors. This form needs to be submitted by the Contractor to the Minnesota Department of Revenue for approval. The form is used to receive certification from the state that the vendor has complied with the requirement to withhold and remit state withholding taxes for employee salaries paid. PAGE 27 § 9.5.4 If the Architect withholds certification for payment under Section 9.5.1.3, the Owner may, at its sole option, issue joint checks to the Contractor and to any Subcontractor or supplier materials or equipment suppliers to whom the Contractor failed to make payment for Work properly performed or material or equipment suitably delivered. If the Owner makes payments by joint check, the Owner shall notify the Architect and the Contractor Architect shall reflect such payment on its next Application the next Certificate for Payment. … § 9.6.2 The Contractor shall pay each Subcontractor, no later than seven days after Prompt Payment to Subcontractors. In accordance with Minnesota law, the Contractor shall include, in all subcontracts and other agreements with its subcontractors and suppliers, a provision which requires the Contractor to pay any of its subcontractors and suppliers within 10 days of the Contractor’s receipt of payment from the Owner, the amount to which the Subcontractor is entitled, reflecting percentages actually retained from payments to the Contractor on account of the Subcontractor’s portion of the Work. The Contractor shall, by appropriate agreement with each Subcontractor, require each Subcontractor to make payments to Sub-subcontractors in a similar manner.for undisputed services or supplies provided by the subcontractor or supplier. The provision shall also include the requirement that the Contractor shall pay interest of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month or any part of a month to the subcontractor or supplier on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor or supplier. The provision shall further provide that the minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10, for an unpaid balance of less than $100, the Contractor shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor or supplier, and a subcontractor or supplier who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Contractor shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorneys’ fees, incurred in bringing the action. PAGE 28 If the Architect does not issue a Certificate for Payment, through no fault of the Contractor, within seven days after receipt of the Contractor’s Application for Payment, or if the Owner does not pay the Contractor within seven days after the date established in the Contract Documents, the amount certified by the Architect or awarded by binding dispute resolution, , then the Contractor may, upon seven additional days’ notice to the Owner and Architect, stop the Work until payment of the amount owing has been received. The Contract Time shall be extended appropriately and the Contract Sum shall be increased by the amount of the Contractor’s reasonable costs of shutdown, delay and start-up, plus interest as provided for in the Contract Documents. PAGE 30 Page 322 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 6 § 9.10.4 The making of final payment shall constitute a waiver of Claims by the Owner except those arising from .1 liens, Claims, security interests, or encumbrances arising out of the Contract and unsettled; .2 failure of the Work to comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents; .3 terms of special warranties required by the Contract Documents; or .4 audits performed by the Owner, if permitted by the Contract Documents, after final payment. PAGE 32 § 11.1.1 Contractor’s Liability Insurance. The Contractor shall purchase and maintain insurance of the types and limits of liability, containing the endorsements, and subject to the terms and conditions, as described in the Agreement or elsewhere in the Contract Documents. The Contractor shall purchase and maintain the required insurance from an insurance company or insurance companies lawfully authorized to issue insurance in the jurisdiction where the Project is located. The Owner, Architect, and Architect’s consultants shall be named as additional insureds under the Contractor’s commercial general liability policy or as otherwise described in the Contract Documents.commercial general liability insurance as required to protect the Contractor, Architect and Owner from claims set forth below which may arise out of, result from, or are in any manner connected with, the execution of the work provided for in this Contract, or occur or result from the use by the Contractor, its agents or employees, of materials, equipment, instrumentalities or other property, whether the same be owned by the Contractor, or third parties, whether such claims arise during Contract performance or subsequent to completion of operations under this Contract and whether operations be by the Contractor or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by Contractor, or by anyone for whose acts Contractor may be liable, and whether such claims are claims for which the Contractor may be, or may be claimed to be, liable. Insurance shall be purchased from a company licensed to do business in the state where the Project is located, and shall be written for not less than the limits of liability specified below or required by law, whichever is greater. A certificate of insurance on a form acceptable to the Owner which verifies the existence of this insurance coverage must be provided to the Owner before work under this contract is begun. The Owner shall be named as an additional insured on a primary and noncontributory basis. The types of claims, required coverages and minimum limits of liability are as follows: A. Claims under Worker’s Compensation, disability benefit and other similar employee benefit acts; claims for damages because of bodily injury, occupational sickness or disease or death of employees. Insurance coverages shall include: Statutory Workers’ Compensation, including Employer’s Liability with a minimum limit of $100,000.00 for each employee. B. Claims for damages because of bodily injury, occupational sickness or disease, or death, by any person other than employees, claims for personal injuries which are sustained (1) by any person as a result of an act or omission directly or indirectly related to the employment of such person by the Contractor, or (2) any other person; claims for damages other than to the Work itself, because of injury to or destruction of tangible property including loss of use resulting therefor. Insurance coverages shall include: Premise – Operations Products-Completed Operations Blanket Contractual – Such insurance and endorsements as will insure the obligations under the provisions of Subsection 11.1.5 of this Document. Broad Form Property Damage Personal Injury Blanket Explosion, Collapse and Underground Property Damage Operations of Independent Contractors Policy Limits: General Aggregate $2,000,000.00 Products/Completed Operations Aggregate $1,000,000.00 Personal Injury $1,000,000.00 Each Occurrence $1,000,000.00 C. Claims for damages because of bodily injury or death of any person, or any property damage arising out of the ownership or use of any motor vehicle. Insurance coverage shall include: Page 323 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 7 Business Auto Liability insurance including owned, hired and non-owned vehicles with limits of $1,000,000.00 Combined Single Limit for each accident for bodily injury and death, or property damage. D. The coverage limits required by Paragraphs (B) and (C) above may be achieved by the use of an Umbrella Excess Liability Policy. The limits of liability specified shall be considered minimum requirements. All aforesaid insurance policies shall be underwritten with responsible insurance carriers, with Best’s Ratings of not less than A and X and otherwise satisfactory to Owner and licensed to provide insurance in the state in which the Project is located. . PAGE 34 § 11.3.1 The Owner and Contractor waive all rights against (1) each other and any of their subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, agents, and employees, each of the other; (2) the Architect and Architect’s consultants; and (3) Separate Contractors, if any, and any of their subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, agents, and employees, for damages caused by fire, or other causes of loss, to the extent those losses are covered by property insurance required by the Agreement or other property insurance applicable to the Project, except such rights as they have to proceeds of such insurance. The Owner or Contractor, as appropriate, shall require similar written waivers in favor of the individuals and entities identified above from the Architect, Architect’s consultants, Separate Contractors, subcontractors, and sub-subcontractors. The policies of insurance purchased and maintained by each person or entity agreeing to waive claims pursuant to this section 11.3.1 shall not prohibit this waiver of subrogation. This waiver of subrogation shall be effective as to a person or entity (1) even though that person or entity would otherwise have a duty of indemnification, contractual or otherwise, (2) even though that person or entity did not pay the insurance premium directly or indirectly, or (3) whether or not the person or entity had an insurable interest in the damaged property. § 11.3.2 If during the Project construction period the Owner insures properties, real or personal or both, at or adjacent to the site by property insurance under policies separate from those insuring the Project, or if after final payment property insurance is to be provided on the completed Project through a policy or policies other than those insuring the Project during the construction period, to the extent permissible by such policies, the Owner waives all rights in accordance with the terms of Section 11.3.1 for damages caused by fire or other causes of loss covered by this separate property insurance. The Owner, at the Owner’s option, may purchase and maintain insurance that will protect as will insure the Owner against loss of use of the Owner’s property, or the inability to conduct normal operations, due to fire or other causes of loss. The Owner waives all rights of action against the Contractor and Architect for loss of use of the Owner’s property, due to fire or other hazards however caused. property due to fire or other hazards, however caused. … § 12.2.2.1 In addition to the Contractor’s obligations under Section 3.5, if, within one year after the date of Substantial Completion of the Work or designated portion thereof or after the date for commencement of warranties established under Section 9.9.1, or by terms of any applicable special warranty required by the Contract Documents, any of the Work is found to be not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall correct it promptly after receipt of notice from the Owner to do so, unless the Owner has previously given the Contractor a written acceptance of such condition. The Owner shall give such notice promptly after discovery of the condition. During the one-year period for correction of Work, if the Owner fails to notify the Contractor and give the Contractor an opportunity to make the correction, the Owner waives the rights to require correction by the Contractor and to make a claim for breach of warranty. If the Contractor fails to correct nonconforming Work within a reasonable time during that period after receipt of notice from the Owner or Architect, the Owner may correct it in accordance with Section 2.5. Contractor warrants their labor for the first year. Owner shall rely exclusives upon warranties provided by supplier of all products sold. Owner shall inspect products within seven (7) days of delivery of the products to the Project site. Owner will be deemed to have accepted the Products unless it notifies Contractor in writing of any nonconforming products during the seven (7) day inspection period and furnishes written evidence or other documents. Page 324 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 8 PAGE 35 The Contract shall be governed by the law of the place where the Project is located, excluding that jurisdiction’s choice of law rules. If the parties have selected arbitration as the method of binding dispute resolution, the Federal Arbitration Act shall govern Section 15.4.located. PAGE 36 § 14.1.1 The Contractor may terminate the Contract if the Work is stopped for a period of 30 consecutive days through no act or fault of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, a Sub-subcontractor, their agents or employees, or any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work, for any of the following reasons: .1 Issuance of an order of a court or other public authority having jurisdiction that requires all Work to be stopped; .2 An act of government, such as a declaration of national emergency, that requires all Work to be stopped; .3 Because the Architect has not issued a Certificate for Payment and has not notified the Contractor of the reason for withholding certification as provided in Section 9.4.1, or because the Owner has not made payment on a Certificate for Payment within the time stated in the Contract Documents; or .4 The Owner has failed to furnish to the Contractor reasonable evidence as required by Section 2.2. § 14.1.2 The Contractor may terminate the Contract if, through no act or fault of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, a Sub-subcontractor, their agents or employees, or any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work, repeated suspensions, delays, or interruptions of the entire Work by the Owner as described in Section 14.3, constitute in the aggregate more than 100 percent of the total number of days scheduled for completion, or 120 days in any 365-day period, whichever is less. § 14.1.3 If one of the reasons described in Section 14.1.1 or 14.1.2 exists, the Contractor may, upon seven days’ notice to the Owner and Architect, terminate the Contract and recover from the Owner payment for Work executed, as well as reasonable overhead and profit on Work not executed, and costs incurred by reason of such termination. PAGE 37 § 14.4.3 In case of such termination for the Owner’s convenience, the Owner shall pay the Contractor for Work properly executed; costs incurred by reason of the termination, including costs attributable to termination of Subcontracts; and the termination fee, if any, set forth in the Agreement.Contractor shall be entitled to payment for Work executedalong with reasonable overhead and profit for the completed Work. PAGE 39 § 15.2 Initial Decision § 15.2.1 Claims, excluding those where the condition giving rise to the Claim is first discovered after expiration of the period for correction of the Work set forth in Section 12.2.2 or arising under Sections 10.3, 10.4, and 11.5, shall be referred to the Initial Decision Maker for initial decision. The Architect will serve as the Initial Decision Maker, unless otherwise indicated in the Agreement. Except for those Claims excluded by this Section 15.2.1, an initial decision shall be required as a condition precedent to mediation of any Claim. If an initial decision has not been rendered within 30 days after the Claim has been referred to the Initial Decision Maker, the party asserting the Claim may demand mediation and binding dispute resolution without a decision having been rendered. Unless the Initial Decision Maker and all affected parties agree, the Initial Decision Maker will not decide disputes between the Contractor and persons or entities other than the Owner. § 15.2.2 The Initial Decision Maker will review Claims and within ten days of the receipt of a Claim take one or more of the following actions: (1) request additional supporting data from the claimant or a response with supporting data from the other party, (2) reject the Claim in whole or in part, (3) approve the Claim, (4) suggest a compromise, or (5) advise the parties that the Initial Decision Maker is unable to resolve the Claim if the Initial Decision Maker lacks sufficient information to evaluate the merits of the Claim or if the Initial Decision Maker concludes that, in the Initial Decision Maker’s sole discretion, it would be inappropriate for the Initial Decision Maker to resolve the Claim. Page 325 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 9 § 15.2.3 In evaluating Claims, the Initial Decision Maker may, but shall not be obligated to, consult with or seek information from either party or from persons with special knowledge or expertise who may assist the Initial Decision Maker in rendering a decision. The Initial Decision Maker may request the Owner to authorize retention of such persons at the Owner’s expense. § 15.2.4 If the Initial Decision Maker requests a party to provide a response to a Claim or to furnish additional supporting data, such party shall respond, within ten days after receipt of the request, and shall either (1) provide a response on the requested supporting data, (2) advise the Initial Decision Maker when the response or supporting data will be furnished, or (3) advise the Initial Decision Maker that no supporting data will be furnished. Upon receipt of the response or supporting data, if any, the Initial Decision Maker will either reject or approve the Claim in whole or in part. § 15.2.5 The Initial Decision Maker will render an initial decision approving or rejecting the Claim, or indicating that the Initial Decision Maker is unable to resolve the Claim. This initial decision shall (1) be in writing; (2) state the reasons therefor; and (3) notify the parties and the Architect, if the Architect is not serving as the Initial Decision Maker, of any change in the Contract Sum or Contract Time or both. The initial decision shall be final and binding on the parties but subject to mediation and, if the parties fail to resolve their dispute through mediation, to binding dispute resolution. § 15.2.6 Either party may file for mediation of an initial decision at any time, subject to the terms of Section 15.2.6.1. § 15.2.6.1 Either party may, within 30 days from the date of receipt of an initial decision, demand in writing that the other party file for mediation. If such a demand is made and the party receiving the demand fails to file for mediation within 30 days after receipt thereof, then both parties waive their rights to mediate or pursue binding dispute resolution proceedings with respect to the initial decision. § 15.2.7 In the event of a Claim against the Contractor, the Owner may, but is not obligated to, notify the surety, if any, of the nature and amount of the Claim. If the Claim relates to a possibility of a Contractor’s default, the Owner may, but is not obligated to, notify the surety and request the surety’s assistance in resolving the controversy. § 15.2.8 If a Claim relates to or is the subject of a mechanic’s lien, the party asserting such Claim may proceed in accordance with applicable law to comply with the lien notice or filing deadlines. § 15.3 Mediation § 15.3.1 Claims, disputes, or other matters in controversy arising out of or related to the Contract, except those waived as provided for in Sections 9.10.4, 9.10.5, and 15.1.7, shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to binding dispute resolution. § 15.3.2 The parties shall endeavor to resolve their Claims by mediation which, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, shall be administered by the American Arbitration Association in accordance with its Construction Industry Mediation Procedures in effect on the date of the Agreement. A request for mediation shall be made in writing, delivered to the other party to the Contract, and filed with the person or entity administering the mediation. The request may be made concurrently with the filing of binding dispute resolution proceedings but, in such event, mediation shall proceed in advance of binding dispute resolution proceedings, which shall be stayed pending mediation for a period of 60 days from the date of filing, unless stayed for a longer period by agreement of the parties or court order. If an arbitration is stayed pursuant to this Section 15.3.2, the parties may nonetheless proceed to the selection of the arbitrator(s) and agree upon a schedule for later proceedings. § 15.3.3 Either party may, within 30 days from the date that mediation has been concluded without resolution of the dispute or 60 days after mediation has been demanded without resolution of the dispute, demand in writing that the other party file for binding dispute resolution. If such a demand is made and the party receiving the demand fails to file for binding dispute resolution within 60 days after receipt thereof, then both parties waive their rights to binding dispute resolution proceedings with respect to the initial decision. § 15.3.4 The parties shall share the mediator’s fee and any filing fees equally. The mediation shall be held in the place where the Project is located, unless another location is mutually agreed upon. Agreements reached in mediation shall be enforceable as settlement agreements in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Page 326 of 1086 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document A201 – 2017. Copyright © 1911, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1987, 1997, 2007 and 2017. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 10 § 15.4 Arbitration § 15.4.1 If the parties have selected arbitration as the method for binding dispute resolution in the Agreement, any Claim subject to, but not resolved by, mediation shall be subject to arbitration which, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, shall be administered by the American Arbitration Association in accordance with its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules in effect on the date of the Agreement. The Arbitration shall be conducted in the place where the Project is located, unless another location is mutually agreed upon. A demand for arbitration shall be made in writing, delivered to the other party to the Contract, and filed with the person or entity administering the arbitration. The party filing a notice of demand for arbitration must assert in the demand all Claims then known to that party on which arbitration is permitted to be demanded. § 15.4.1.1 A demand for arbitration shall be made no earlier than concurrently with the filing of a request for mediation, but in no event shall it be made after the date when the institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on the Claim would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. For statute of limitations purposes, receipt of a written demand for arbitration by the person or entity administering the arbitration shall constitute the institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on the Claim. § 15.4.2 The award rendered by the arbitrator or arbitrators shall be final, and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. § 15.4.3 The foregoing agreement to arbitrate and other agreements to arbitrate with an additional person or entity duly consented to by parties to the Agreement, shall be specifically enforceable under applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. § 15.4.4 Consolidation or Joinder § 15.4.4.1 Subject to the rules of the American Arbitration Association or other applicable arbitration rules, either party may consolidate an arbitration conducted under this Agreement with any other arbitration to which it is a party provided that (1) the arbitration agreement governing the other arbitration permits consolidation, (2) the arbitrations to be consolidated substantially involve common questions of law or fact, and (3) the arbitrations employ materially similar procedural rules and methods for selecting arbitrator(s). § 15.4.4.2 Subject to the rules of the American Arbitration Association or other applicable arbitration rules, either party may include by joinder persons or entities substantially involved in a common question of law or fact whose presence is required if complete relief is to be accorded in arbitration, provided that the party sought to be joined consents in writing to such joinder. Consent to arbitration involving an additional person or entity shall not constitute consent to arbitration of any claim, dispute or other matter in question not described in the written consent. § 15.4.4.3 The Owner and Contractor grant to any person or entity made a party to an arbitration conducted under this Section 15.4, whether by joinder or consolidation, the same rights of joinder and consolidation as those of the Owner and Contractor under this Agreement. Page 327 of 1086 AIA Document D401 – 2003. Copyright © 1992 and 2003. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No.2114499103 which expires on 01/24/2025, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (1500400491) 1 ’Certification of Document s Authenticity AIA®™ – 2003 Document D401 I, Scott Neal, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, that I created the attached final document simultaneously with its associated Additions and Deletions Report and this certification at 11:04:10 ET on 12/05/2024 under Order No. 2114499103 from AIA Contract Documents software and that in preparing the attached final document I made no changes to the original text of AIA® Document A201™ – 2017, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, other than those additions and deletions shown in the associated Additions and Deletions Report. _____________________________________________________________ (Signed) _____________________________________________________________ (Title) _____________________________________________________________ (Dated) Page 328 of 1086 d PURCHASE REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.10 Prepared By: Zuleyka Marquez, PE, Project Manager Item Type: Request for Purchase Department: Engineering Item Title: Request for Purchase: Physical Conditioning Equipment for Fire Station 2 Action Requested: Approve request for purchase of physical conditioning equipment for the new Fire Station 2 from Johnson Fitness & Wellness for $98,868. Information/Background: This package is for training equipment for the physical conditioning and wellness rooms at the new Fire Station 2. These spaces are critical for firefighters' physical and mental health, allowing them to better serve the community. Requisition Number: 12400269 Funding Source: ARPA funds Vendor: Johnson Fitness & Wellness Equipment Status: New Cost: $98,868.23 Resources/Financial Impacts: Funding by ARPA funds. This package was included in the budget. Johnson Fitness & Wellness will coordinate delivery and installation with the construction manager. The Fire Department will maintain the equipment. Relationship to City Policies: Supports Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 9 Community Services and Facilities. Budget Pillar: Reliable Service Values Impact: Health Equips the physical conditioning and wellness rooms to promote and protect the physical and mental health of first responders. Page 329 of 1086 Stewardship The physical conditioning room will be accessible to City staff from other departments. Supporting Documentation: 1. Johnson & Fitness Wellness Agreement Page 330 of 1086 Page 331 of 1086 Ship To Information Bill To Information Shaun White4401 W. 76th StEdina , MN 55435 Edina Fire Station # 2 Home: (952) 826-0328 QuoteKevin Vanoverbeke (4196)7585 Equitable Dr.Eden Prairie, MN 55344Phone: (952) 240-4512 Fax: (952) 906-6905Email: kevin.vanoverbeke@johnsonfit.com 22-063709Quote Order Expiration Date:12/31/2024 Terms:Prepaid Johnson Fitness & Wellness Shaun White4401 W. 76th StEdina , MN 55435 Edina Fire Station # 2 Home: (952) 826-0328 07/13/23Date Email: swhite@EdinaMN.gov Email: swhite@EdinaMN.gov Qty Description Price Ext. PriceSKUDeliveryMethodTaxYourPriceList Matrix Cardio with LED Consoles Deliver2T-PS-LED Matrix Performance LED Treadmill $6,150.00 $12,300.00$11,420.00 Deliver1CM-ES-LED Matrix Endurance LED Climbmill $6,150.00 $6,150.00$10,895.00 Deliver2OCTXT1DOctane XT-One Elliptical - Dark $6,380.00 $12,760.00$7,999.00 Deliver2OCTROOctane Rower $1,360.00 $2,720.00$1,699.00 Deliver1LMRevPro-A Lemond Rev Pro Spin Bike w/ Dual Sided Pedals $1,010.00 $1,010.00$1,599.00Deliver1LMPilotLemond Pilot Cadence Meter for Pro Spin Bike $145.00 $145.00$199.00 Deliver1COMMDEL01Commercial Delivery & Assembly $980.00 $980.00$980.00Special Instructions:Every treadmill requires NEMA 5-20R receptical 110 Volt 20 amp dedicated outlet. NET 30TERMS Item Total:Tax:TOTAL: $36,065.00$0.00$36,065.00 1 2of Page 332 of 1086 Ship To Information Bill To Information Shaun White4401 W. 76th StEdina , MN 55435 Edina Fire Station # 2 Home: (952) 826-0328 QuoteKevin Vanoverbeke (4196)7585 Equitable Dr.Eden Prairie, MN 55344Phone: (952) 240-4512 Fax: (952) 906-6905Email: kevin.vanoverbeke@johnsonfit.com 22-064017Quote Order Expiration Date:11/30/2024 Terms:Prepaid Johnson Fitness & Wellness Shaun White4401 W. 76th StEdina , MN 55435 Edina Fire Station # 2 Home: (952) 826-0328 08/08/23Date Email: swhite@EdinaMN.gov Email: swhite@EdinaMN.gov Qty Description Price Ext. PriceSKUDeliveryMethodTaxYourPriceList Deliver1TF- XRACK-9U-103-F16 Custom Siege & Custom XCREATE- $56,988.00 $56,988.00$84,656.00Three Wall Module Custom Siege- 9 FT Blue Uprights - Ground Rotaional Bar Trainer- Two Rock Climbing Kits - Ninja Cross- Wall Ball Package 12,14,16,18,20 lbs- Med Ball Package 4,6,8,10,12 lbs- Torpedo Bag Package 10,20,30,40,50 lbs- Bumper Plates 45 lbs -16, 35 lbs- 8, 25 lbs16- Bumper Plates 10 lbs-16, 5 lbs8, 2.5 lbs 8- Two X Rack Platform Two Sided Inserts - Four Olympic Bars- Three Flat Incline Benches Total- Dip Step Anchor-Gymnastics Rings XCREATE 3 Module Wall - Black Satin - 4 FT Ball Hanging Storage- 5 Barbell Storage Module - Rubber EZ Curl Barbell Set 20-60 lbs- Cable Component Heavy Module Station- 4:1 Graduated 320 lbs (145.1 kg) Weight Stacks- Accessory Storage Module With Mats 1 3of Page 333 of 1086 Qty Description Price Ext. PriceSKUDeliveryMethodTaxYourPriceList - Lat Pulldown Module - Seated Row Station- Strength Band Package 5-35, 10-60, 25-80,50-120- Powertube Package Medium, Heavy, Xheavy- 3 stability 55cm balls- Slam Ball Package 10,15,20,25 lbs-Torpedo Bag Package 10,20,30,40 lbs- Kettlebell Package 4,6,8,12,16, 20 KG- Rubber Hex DBU Set 5-100- Heavy Bag 100 LB - Battle Rope 30 FT With Nylon Cover- Two Stealth Air Bikes- Tank MX With Removable Performance Handles- 2 Tripleplyo 20-24-30 Foam Plyo Box- Four Yoga Mats- Relentless Ripper Deliver1COMMDEL01Commercial Delivery & Assembly $5,415.00 $5,415.00$5,415.00Special Instructions:Net 30 terms. Torque Quote #: QT79900-07 Item Total:Tax:TOTAL: $62,403.00$0.00$62,403.00 2 3of Page 334 of 1086 Standard Terms and Conditions 1.All orders must be prepaid before shipment without approved credit. 2.These prices are subject to change after 30 days from document date. 3.There will be a 1.5% monthly service charge on all overdue accounts. The buyer is also responsible for any collection and/or legal fees involved in collecting past due accounts. 4.Any changes on orders must be made within 7 days after the order is accepted. 5.Clerical errors subject to correction. All prices and agreements are contingent upon strikes, accidents, and other causes avoidable or beyond our control. 6.Buyer agrees to promptly file claim for all goods damaged in transit. 7.There will be a 25-35% restocking charge on merchandise ordered but not accepted. Special orders are not refundable. Delivery, Set-Up and Freight charges will not be refunded. 8.A Preventative Maintenance Agreement is available for all equipment. 9.Equipment lease is available with approved credit. 10.All unit prices are F.O.B. manufacturer.11. Products purchased without commercial warranties that are placed in non-residential settings void manufacturer's warranty. All repair costs are customers responsibility. Please send check payments to: DBA Johnson Fitness & Wellness 1600 Landmark Drive Cottage Grove, WI 53527 Acceptance of Proposal: These prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. I am authorized to order the listed equipment with full understanding of the payment terms. Authorized Signature:_______________________________________________ Print Name:_______________________________________________ P.O. Number:_______________________________________________ Date of Acceptance:_______________________________________________ www.johnsonfit.com/commercial 3 3of Page 335 of 1086 Page 336 of 1086 d PURCHASE REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.11 Prepared By: Ross Bintner, Engineering Services Manager Item Type: Request for Purchase Department: Engineering Item Title: Request for Purchase: Professional Services for South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements Action Requested: Approve Request for Purchase for Professional Services for South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements with Bolton Menk for $830,103. Information/Background: City staff issued a request for proposals. Responding firms included Bolton and Menk, Kimley Horn, SEH, Stanley, and TKDA. Staff reviewed proposals for best value and interviewed a subset of the responding firms to better judge the proposals. Following interviews, the selection committee unanimously recommended the proposal from Bolton and Menk. This proposal is 15.8% of the total estimated project cost from the CIP. Typical project consulting including the construction phase is 20-26% of the estimated project value. This proposal is in line with typical project budgets. Upon Council approval, this project will study various construction methods for a deep sanitary sewer trunk line running from France Ave to Highway 100 in the South Cornelia and Lake Edina neighborhoods. After developing a variety of options, Council will be presented with a recommended engagement plan and the public will be engaged consistent with the plan. Segment 3 is planned for 2026 construction, Segment 2 for 2028, and Segment 1 for 2028 or later. Public engagement options will describe risks, benefits and tradeoffs of a variety of deep sewer construction to inform a staff recommendation for Council selection ahead of project bid and build. Requisition Number: 12400268 Funding Source: Sanitary Sewer Fund Vendor: Bolton Menk Equipment Status: Replacement Cost: $830,103 Resources/Financial Impacts: The project was initially listed as ENG 23007 in the 2023 CIP, and included segments 1 and 2 for $13.1M(2023) for design and construction. Further review is included for segment 3. Relationship to City Policies: City Capital Improvement Plan, City Comprensive Plan, Water Chapter. Page 337 of 1086 Budget Pillar: Strong Foundation Values Impact: Stewardship Replacing infrastructure with an asset management approach extends the life of the asset. Engagement Staff will develop and council will approve a public engagement plan to bring the community into the project. Supporting Documentation: 1. Bolton and Menk Agreement 2. South Trunk Sanitary Phasing Graphic Page 338 of 1086 Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer. N:\Proposals\Edina\South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements 102224\_Proposal Files 24P.004089.000\Letter Proposal_South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements.docx 111 Washington Avenue South Suite 650 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone: (612) 416-0220 Bolton-Menk.com December 9, 2024 Mr. Ross Bintner, P.E. Engineering Services Manager City of Edina RE: Proposal for Professional Engineering Services South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements City of Edina, MN Dear Ross, Thank you for allowing Bolton & Menk to provide you with this proposal for professional engineering services for the South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project. This proposal is based on the RFP and selection process last month. This proposal is being offered as a Supplemental Agreement to our June 18, 2013 Master Agreement for Professional Engineering Services with the City of Edina. The City of Edina has initiated the South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements project to enhance infrastructure, ensure long-term service reliability, and better prepare for redevelopment. This project will require a multidisciplinary approach to integrate sanitary sewer evaluation and design, maintenance of traffic and access, stormwater management, and pedestrian upgrades, ensuring the most effective solution is implemented. It will also require a highly professional, effective, and accountable process that reflects the standards Edina sets for itself. Our team at Bolton & Menk, Inc. is ready to deliver this solution. Local Knowledge – Our extensive experience working with the City of Edina has prepared us exceptionally well for this project. In addition to our work with the Engineering Department and on past sanitary sewer improvement projects, Haila Maze's work on several related planning studies has given us invaluable insights into the community's needs, priorities, and expectations. Furthermore, several team members live and work within or close to Edina. This not only fosters a stronger connection with the local community but also ensures that we have a vested interest in the success of local projects. Our team's local presence means we are readily available to address any concerns that arise promptly. Customized Engagement – With the level of impact on Edina neighborhoods anticipated with this project, effective and regular communication will be essential. We know that Edina residents have high expectations for how they are informed and involved in projects impacting their community. We are ready to meet the needs of a public that will expect a well-defined and carefully framed understanding of the issues involved, accessible opportunities for educational content and thoughtful dialogue, and transparent accountability on decision-making – while advancing the city’s public interest. Page 339 of 1086 Depth of Expertise – Our team comprises seasoned professionals who bring a wealth of knowledge and experience to the table. We have strategically partnered with Black & Veatch to provide national level depth and breadth for the analysis and design of this challenging sanitary sewer project. Our team will work closely with the city’s staff, leadership, and the public to identify and implement solutions that effectively meet needs while minimizing disruption due to construction. Moreover, our diverse team includes specialists in various fields such as hydrology, structural engineering, and environmental science. This breadth of expertise allows us to approach each project holistically, considering all aspects of the design and construction process. By leveraging our collective knowledge, we can develop comprehensive solutions that address the unique challenges posed by the South Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements project. SCOPE OF WORK PHASE 1: DATA COLLECTION, ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS & EAW Phase 1 work will help set this project up for success and includes gathering existing condition information, evaluating installation methods for the sanitary sewer improvements and initiation of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). Our team will gather the existing conditions data including record drawings and existing utility maps. We will also perform a field survey to gather topographical data, locate existing utilities, and identify any potential obstacles. Our team will help identify geotechnical evaluation needs and coordinate that work with the city’s selected soils consultant. Additionally, our team will evaluate different installation methods including traditional open-cut and trenchless technology. We will collaborate closely with city staff to establish comprehensive evaluation criteria. These criteria should encompass a range of factors, including but not limited to cost efficiency, impact on the local community, property acquisition needs, potential risk factors, and the overall timeline for project completion. We will also develop a comprehensive matrix to compare all identified installation methods based on the established evaluation criteria. This will be a detailed comparison, highlighting the strengths, weaknesses, and risks of each method. It will include factors such as cost analysis, environmental impact, duration of installation, and potential disruptions. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY Bolton & Menk will complete a topographic field survey for segments 2 & 3 to collect above-ground topographic data including: pavement surface, curb & gutter, utility markings, features within right-of- way. Right-of-way will also be established for the project area. The topographic survey will be utilized as the basis for preliminary and final design for segments 2 & 3. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS A multi-phase geotechnical investigation is needed to obtain information that will be used in preliminary and final design. The geotechnical field work will include drilling exploratory borings, installation of piezometers and conducting in-situ borehole testing (slug testing), and test pits. Laboratory testing on select soil samples includes characterization, strength, swell, consolidation and corrosivity. The City will subcontract with a geotechnical drilling and testing firm to perform all geotechnical investigations. The geotechnical drilling and testing firm will prepare the following reports to document the results of the investigations: Page 340 of 1086 • Geotechnical Data Report – Phase I : This report will cover the initial geotechnical investigations used for the Alternatives Analysis. • Geotechnical Data Report – Phase II: This report will cover the final geotechnical investigations once the construction methods and sewer alignment is selected. This data will be used to complete Detailed Design. Engineer will work with the City’s contracted geotechnical firm to implement the field work and make laboratory testing assignments. Tasks include the following: Task 1 Geotechnical Investigation • Assistance in development of detailed scope of work and planning for two phases of geotechnical investigations • Periodic site visits during field investigation programs • Participation in investigation coordination and planning meetings • Review and evaluation of soil samples • Review and provide comments on geotechnical data reports and in-situ testing summary documents Task 2 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing • Coordination with assignment of laboratory testing for two phases of geotechnical investigations • Site visit to laboratory testing facility • Review and evaluation of soil samples All boring locations will be surveyed. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET The proposed sewer improvements exceeds the threshold outlined in MN Rules 4410.4300, Subpart 18. Wastewater Systems, requiring mandatory preparation of an EAW.1 This document will help the MPCA determine if an Environmental Impact Statement is needed for the proposed project or if the project can move forward with permits and approvals before construction. The EAW will document the natural and social environment within the project area, evaluate the potential impacts resulting from the proposed project, and discuss any required minimization or mitigation efforts. The EAW document and process will be prepared consistent with requirements under MN Rules 4410, the Environmental Quality Board’s (EQB) Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules (May 2010), and the MPCA’s environmental review guidance. BMI will prepare the EAW document, drawing from our multidisciplinary team of technical professionals with experience in environmental planning, cultural resources assessments, and natural resources surveys with an emphasis on accuracy and consistency. We will also coordinate these efforts through city staff, MPCA, and other agencies and organizations throughout the process. The EAW will include a comprehensive assessment to fulfill the EQB guidelines and requirements. Once a final draft is prepared, BMI will forward the document to the RGU for final review and follow-on submittal to the EQB’s distribution list. BMI staff will coordinate with city staff to respond to any substantial comments and develop the Record of Decision (ROD) for the final piece of the EAW process. 1 Minn. Statutes 4410.4300, subp. 18, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/4410.4300/ Page 341 of 1086 Of note, the EAW is not a substitute for any required permits and those will be completed by the City and/or project team following a final Record of Decision (ROD) by the RGU. Our project team will complete required EAW revisions in an expedient manner when requested by either the City or the MPCA. Unless such revisions were originally anticipated as part of the base EAW, any additional assessments or extensive revisions will be performed as additional services at our standard hourly rates. The MPCA states the average EAW process averages 8 to 14 months depending on review timelines and MPCA requirements. Our intent is to reduce that timeline to make this environmental review process as efficient as possible. No construction activities may commence before environmental clearance. We took into consideration the MPCA’s review requirements and propose EAW completion in approximately 11 months depending on the need for either natural or cultural resources fieldwork. Data collection and pipe installation analysis is expected to commence in late December 2024 and be completed in early 2025. The MPCA states the average EAW process averages 8 to 14 months depending on review timelines and MPCA requirements. Our intent is to reduce that timeline to make this environmental review process as efficient as possible. No construction activities may commence before environmental clearance. We took into consideration the MPCA’s review requirements and propose EAW completion in approximately 11 months depending on the need for either natural or cultural resources fieldwork. PHASE 1 DELIVERABLES: Base map (AutoCAD) Evaluation matrix of installation methods Recommendation on installation methods Proposed scope for Phase 1 geotechnical work Evaluation of soil samples EAW PHASE 2: PRELIMINARY DESIGN With a consensus of installation method, 30% design will be completed for all three project segments. Preliminary design will include pipe grades and manhole placement along with rim and invert elevations. Construction considerations for the various segments will also be highlighted. We will also complete preliminary design for stormwater management, including review and analysis of permitting needs and stormwater modeling to determine trunk upsizing needs. Initial coordination with MnDOT and Hennepin County will be completed to discuss sanitary sewer installation alternatives and ensure their support for permitting the future work. Permitting needs will consider Segment 1 as a standalone project and Segments 2 and 3 as one project. Anticipated permits include Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD), MPCA Construction Stormwater Permit, and City of Edina MS4 Permit compliance. Preliminary design assumes that NMCWD stormwater standards are triggered and preliminary BMP siting and sizing will be complete. Page 342 of 1086 It is anticipated that stormwater models are available from the city and Barr to help plan for overall trunk storm sewer needs in support of the Lake Cornelia stormwater outlet. Storm sewer upgrades are planned within Segment 2 and partially in Segment 3. The city has identified specific concerns related to known local flooding issues and management of stormwater during construction. Depending on the construction method of the sanitary sewer, stormwater must be temporarily routed during construction and prior to installation of reconstructed storm sewer networks. We will leverage the city’s regional stormwater management modeling to understand the magnitude of service discharge rates for a variety of events and work with the city to cost effectively manage the flood risk. We understand that high groundwater elevations in certain areas will require extensive dewatering during construction. The impacts of surface inflow will be especially sensitive in the high groundwater areas. Our team will size temporary stormwater conveyances that may include, but are not limited to: • Concrete infrastructure ideally serving both temporary and permanent stormwater conveyances. • Temporary nyloplast and plastic pipe at shallow depths. • Open channels where feasible to manage run-on water within the sanitary sewer trenching area. • Temporary connections to adjacent storm sewer. • Pumps and force mains to overcome elevation challenges. Preliminary design for roadways will be minimal and used primarily to support preliminary cost estimates and identify construction limits. PHASE 2 DELIVERABLES: Preliminary (30%) design plans Permitting needs Preliminary stormwater management plan Preliminary (30%) cost estimate PHASE 3: PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT We know that engaging with Edina isn’t like every other place. We expect people to participate with thoughtful insights, relevant information, and strong opinions – and this excites us! Listening to stakeholders’ concerns and ideas and helping them understand the needs and impacts of this project are critical to its success. We anticipate engaging with the public on topics including: Long-term impacts on adjacent properties Staging, detours, wayfinding, and communication during construction How the project will be safe and sustainable for the environment Coordination with other projects and initiatives Education on the best practices being used throughout this project In collaboration with city staff, we will prepare and implement a public engagement plan that informs, consults, involves, and collaborates with the community. This will include outreach to residents, property owners, businesses, local institutions, and other stakeholders. Page 343 of 1086 Our team has a robust and comprehensive toolkit of engagement strategies, including: In-person community meetings at key milestones Pop-ups held during local events and activities Educational materials about the project and its outcomes Emails, postcards, and door-to-door outreach to impacted properties Content for Edina’s Better Together online engagement platform As requested, briefings and presentations to advisory boards and elected officials Throughout the process, we will document the input received and responses, demonstrating responsiveness and accountability. This will be included in the engagement summary. PHASE 3 DELIVERABLES: Public engagement plan and materials Summary of engagement activities and feedback PHASE 4: FINAL DESIGN AND BIDDING The Bolton & Menk team will efficiently carry the approved 30% plans into the final design phase. In Phase 4, we will build on Phases 1-3 and develop detailed design plans for Segments 2 and 3, to 60% and then to 100%, ensuring all technical specifications, regulatory requirements, and community feedback are meticulously incorporated. Individual plan sets for Segment 2 & 3 will be prepared. Bolton & Menk recently completed design of France Avenue improvements beginning at 76th Street. This experience working with Hennepin County will allow for efficient and collaborative design of the improvements at 72nd Street and France Avenue, including curb, median, and pedestrian components. Regular design meetings with city staff will help ensure that all design elements meet city standards and regulatory requirements. Our project team will work closely with NMCWD to meet the regulatory requirements for the project. We assume that the utility installation and corresponding pavement reconstruction will trigger NMCWD stormwater management requirements. Bolton & Menk will secure all NMCWD, MPCA, and other local permits. Coordination and permitting with Hennepin County will be needed for the work at France Avenue. SUBSURFACE UTILITY EXPLORATION Engineer will develop a plan for subsurface utility exploration to obtain existing utility location data, which will then be added to the project drawings. The plan will include requested locations for potholing or test holes to determine the horizontal layout and vertical depth to the extent possible. The City will hire a subsurface utility exploration company to complete the field work and provide the requested data in a digital format. The subsurface utility exploration will be performed prior to the alignment evaluation and preliminary design so that the data can be incorporated into the evaluation. Page 344 of 1086 MAINTAINING FLOW DURING CONSTRUCTION AND BYPASS PUMPING CRITERIA Engineer will develop criteria to determine the Contractor’s requirements for maintaining flow in the existing trunk sewer and service laterals during construction. The criteria will prohibit sewer backups and provide the Contractor with the information needed to maintain flow during construction. The criteria will include, but not be limited to, flow rate information for sewer segments, maximum allowable lateral outages, and bypass pumping requirements. The criteria will be developed after the alignment and preliminary design have been finalized. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING Task 1 – Geotechnical Engineering Engineering evaluations will be completed to address all geotechnical aspects of the project that may include open-cut excavations and temporary/permanent support, subsurface drainage provisions, dewatering requirements, special backfill requirements, utilities, interceptor excavation and backfill details, hydraulic structure excavations and backfill considerations. Tasks are expected to include the following: • Review and assess all available geotechnical data obtained during the site-specific investigations. • Evaluate site dewatering requirements at the location of excavations. • Determine fill compaction placement criteria. • Assess any requirements for drainage around subsurface structures and utilities. • Determine lateral earth pressures for design of subsurface structures. • Evaluate excavation and backfill requirements for the new interceptor and associated hydraulic structures. Task 2 – Trenchless Installation Engineering Complete tunnel engineering evaluations to evaluate alternative tunnel and shaft construction methods. Evaluations will include trenchless crossing for the interceptor beneath Minnesota Highway 100 and possibly France Avenue, along with an evaluation of trenchless installation methods along the sewer alignment. Tasks are expected to include the following: • Review and assess all available geotechnical data obtained during the site-specific investigations. • Evaluate alternative trenchless methods that may include shields, micro-tunnel boring machines, pressurized face machines and slurry machines. It is assumed that the required casing material will be steel pipe with the carrier pipe blocked in-place. Selected construction methods shall “match” the anticipated ground behavior to facilitate tunnel advancement, limit loss of ground and associated surface settlement and mitigate potential damage to existing infrastructure. Complete tunneling settlement analyses and develop settlement criteria to be incorporated into the contract documents. Determine need for any adjacent structure protection based on the results of the settlement analysis. • Assess alternative shaft construction methods for the trenchless crossings. Evaluate staging area requirements, shaft size and geometry criteria, estimated ground deformations, requirements for pre-excavation dewatering and suitable excavation support systems. Develop all required design and construction criteria associated with trenchless crossings and shaft construction. Page 345 of 1086 • Prepare a Trenchless Crossing Design Technical Memorandum to document the results of the tunneling evaluations and to provide recommendations for design and construction. The technical memorandum will address preferred construction methods, settlement criteria, ground improvement and dewatering requirements, carrier pipe installation, geotechnical instrumentation provisions, staging area criteria and any considerations for transitions to open- cut segments along the new interceptor. Update the technical memorandum during design to provide additional design criteria as needed. • Prepare an abbreviated draft Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) for submittal with the 90 percent design package. Preparation of the abbreviated report will be in general accordance with guidelines for smaller projects established in the ASCE document titled “Geotechnical Baseline Reports for Construction”, 2007. The GBR for a project of this size will include introductory sections, present general site and subsurface conditions, discuss anticipated ground conditions/behavior, and address considerations for trenchless crossings, shaft construction, open-cut construction and transitions to open-cut construction. The GBR will be finalized for the 100 percent bid ready document submittal and serve as contract documents. The front-end contract documents will be reviewed as to how they relate to use of GBRs, along with provisions to resolve claims of Differing Site Conditions (DSCs). Supplemental Conditions will be prepared as necessary to make any refinements to the front-end contract documents. Deliverables: • Trenchless Crossing Design Technical Memorandum • Geotechnical Baseline Report Bid preparation will culminate with a final bid package by the end of December 2025, with bidding and award in late January 2026. PHASE 4 DELIVERABLES: 60% and 100% design plans and cost estimates Trenchless Crossing Design Technical Memorandum Geotechnical Baseline Report Project permits Final cost estimate Final bid documents Page 346 of 1086 ESTIMATED FEES Bolton & Menk proposes to complete the above scope of work on an hourly basis for a not to exceed fee of $830,103. These fees for the individual tasks are estimates, a breakdown of the estimated fees are as follows: Phase 1 Data Collection & Alternatives Analysis $ 121,132 Phase 1a EAW $ 49,629 Phase 2 Preliminary Design $ 165,802 Phase 3 Pubic Engagement $ 47,387 Phase 4 Final Design & Bidding $ 442,353 Expenses – B&V $ 3,800 Total Estimated Fee $ 830,103 Thank you, again, for allowing Bolton & Menk to present you with this proposal. In continued service to the City of Edina, we are excited about the opportunity to contribute to this important project. I will serve as your lead client contact and project manager. Please contact me at 612-756-3427 or Sarah.Lloyd@bolton-menk.com if you have any questions regarding our proposal. Sincerely, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Sarah E. Lloyd. P.E. Principal Engineer Accepted By: ____________________________________ Date: _____________ Page 347 of 1086 Page 348 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.12 Prepared By: Andrew Slama, Fire Chief Item Type: Resolution Department: Fire Item Title: Resolution No. 2024-119: Setting Ambulance and Miscellaneous Fire Fees for 2025 Action Requested: Approve Resolution No. 2024-119 setting ambulance and miscellaneous fire fees for 2025. Information/Background: Annually, the Ambulance and Miscellaneous Fire fees are evaluated and presented to the City Council. Services provided are billed at this rate for the applicable year. The document shows the current year's fees so that the Council can compare them with previous charges. In 2025, staff are recommending a 3% increase in fees from 2024. This fee increase is associated with cost of living increases recognized by staff for services provided. Rounding to the nearest dollar, for each service, has been completed and is included with the final fee amount. Resources/Financial Impacts: • Budget – Revenue generated from billing for services is budgeted and the 2025 fees proposed are within the 2025 budget forecast. • Implementation – Fire Department staff will implement the updated fees for 2025 billing and invoices. • Operation –Fire Department staff will update to ensure operations during 2025 utilize the 2025 fee schedule. Relationship to City Policies: General Fund Budget Supporting Documentation: 1. Resolution No. 2024-119 Ambulance and Misc. Fire Fees Page 349 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-119 Setting Ambulance and Miscellaneous Fire Fees for 2025 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council hereby approve and set the following ambulance service and miscellaneous fire fees for 2025. 2024 2025 Level 1 - ON-SCENE TREATMENT Specialized medical services performed at the scene with no transport involved BLS TREATMENT - NO TRANSPORT ALS TREATMENT – NO TRANSPORT Admin. of one or more medications with no transport $463.00 $1,030.00 $477.00 $1,061.00 Level 2 - MINOR CARE (BLS) BASIC LIFE SUPPORT $1,751.00 $1,804.00 Level 3 - MODERATE CARE ALS-1 $1,957.00 $2,016.00 Level 4 - MAJOR CARE ALS-2 $2,369.00 $2,440.00 RESPONSE TO SCENE AND NO TREATMENT OR TRANSPORTATION PROVIDED No Charge No Charge OXYGEN ADMINISTRATION Included in above Included in above MILEAGE FROM SCENE TO HOSPITAL $30.00/mile $31.00/mile ADDITIONAL STAFFING OR MECHANICAL EXTRICATION $807/hour 1-hour minimum $831/hour 1-hour minimum VEHICLE DECONTAMINATION $1,205.00 $1,241.15 AMBULANCE FEES: Service Level Fees for Ambulance Service, including medical treatment and/or transportation to a medical facility. Page 350 of 1086 SPECIALIZED RESPONSE 2024 2025 Chief Officer/ Vehicle $113.00/hour $116.00/hour Fire Engine/ Rescue Company $625.00/hour $643.00/hour Ladder Company $824.00/hour $849.00/hour Ambulance $269.00/hour $277.00/hour Special Operations Team $1,215/hour $1,251/hour Firefighter $100/hour/person (2-hour minimum) $103/hour/person (2-hour minimum) Instructor Fee Cost + 15% administrative charge Cost + 15% administrative charge Specialized Equipment Cost + 15% administrative charge Cost + 15% administrative charge Supplies or Additional Personnel Cost + 15% administrative charge Cost + 15% administrative charge Disposal Cost + 15% administrative charge Cost + 15% administrative charge Other City Resources Cost + 15% administrative charge Cost + 15% administrative charge Standby at a non-City event, or another event, not related to emergency response. (1 hour minimum with additional ½ hour on each side of the event for set up and clean up) $100/hour per staff member scheduled $103/hour per staff member scheduled Adopted this 17th day of December 2024. Attest:_________________________ ______________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 17th day of December, 2024. ___________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 351 of 1086 d PURCHASE REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.13 Prepared By: Shaun White, Training and Safety Chief Item Type: Request for Purchase Department: Fire Item Title: Request for Purchase: 2025 Mental Health and Resiliency Program Contract for Fire Department Action Requested: Approve the Request for Purchase of the 2025 Mental Health and Resiliency Program Contract for the Fire Department with Blue Peak Consulting for $26,250. Information/Background: Par360 is a Mental Health support and resiliency creation program that Edina Fire has worked with for two years. The department has committed to improving the services delivered to our Firefighters by embedding Dr. Gavian within our ranks on a monthly basis giving increasing access and resources to our members. The core mission of Par360 is to: • Provide Chiefs action plans to deal with mental health issues. • Provide tactical response to critical incidents and personnel issues. • Provide Emergency Response, consultation, and training. • Provide skills to identify, decon, and solve emotional issues. Requisition Number: 12400271 Funding Source: ARPA Funding Vendor: Blue Peak Consulting Equipment Status: N/A Cost: $26,250 Resources/Financial Impacts: • ARPA funds will be utilized for payment and fulfillment of the contract requirements for 2025. • The implementation process will be a seamless transition following two years of partnership with Dr. Gavian. • The Training Division, under Asst. Chief White, will facilitate all interactions. Page 352 of 1086 Relationship to City Policies: This program aligns with existing Citywide and Department policies. Human Resources and the Fire Department collaborated on the review of the contract. Budget Pillar: This program will allow for our department to continue our dedication to Reliable Services. Values Impact:Budget Value: • Health: We use a Health-in-All Policies approach (HiAP) to promote and protect the physical, mental, and social wellbeing of all people who live, work, or visit Edina. Supporting Documentation: 1. Blue Peak Consulting Agreement Page 353 of 1086 BLUE PEAK CONSULTING ORGANIZATIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT This Event Agreement is entered into and effective as of this 1st day of January 2025 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the Edina Fire Department (“Client”), having an address of 6250 Tracy Ave, Edina, MN 55436 and Blue Peak Consulting (“Company”), having an address of 1640 Hampshire Ave North, Golden Valley, MN 55427. In consideration of Client retaining Company to provide event services, it is agreed as follows: 1. SCOPE OF EVENT SERVICES Client hereby retains the Company to provide event services in the area of mental health and resilience at PAR360 from 01/01/25 until 12/31/25 (the “Event” of “Events”). (a) The services shall include the following: 1. Embedded Department Visits – Visits to the department up to twice per month; consultation, care, trainings, and support may be done during these visits. 2. Priority Care Coordination– Immediate expert assistance via a call line for referrals and resources. This can be conducted on site during embedded department visits or by phone when needed in between visits ensuring no one is left behind. 3. Individual Pre-Plan Meetings – Dedicated annual sessions for resilience pre-planning sessions with behavioral health providers familiar with firefighter challenges; these will be conducted on site during clinician visits. 4. Crisis Response – Response that focuses on building resiliency and communication after a traumatic event has occurred with department personnel; up to 40 hours that can be used annually. Additional hours needed that exceed 40 hours will be billed separately.* 5. Stress Management Modules– Online self-paced training modules for all department members. 6. Chief Consultation and Support – Ongoing direct line for Chiefs to mental health experts. Monthly Chief conference calls of all PAR360 member Chiefs to address concerns and issues unique to respective departments and provide networking and problem sharing/solving opportunities. (b) Additional services, beyond those described above, will require additional fees to be discussed and agreed upon by the parties. 2. CLIENT DUTIES (a) Compensation: In consideration for the services provided by Company to Client as set forth in paragraph 1 above, Client agrees to pay Company a total Event Fee of $26,250.00 (the “Event Fee”). Company’s obligation to render services hereunder is conditioned upon Client’s payment of said fee on a timely basis. *Additional crisis response hours that exceed 40 hours will be billed separately a$200 / hour. Page 354 of 1086 BLUE PEAK CONSULTING (b) The Event Fee shall be paid according to the following schedule: i. Total Event fee will be broken into two equal payments over the course of the contract (50%; or $13,125.00) of the total Event Fee ($26,250.00). ii. Invoices will be submitted on or close to the following dates and are due within 30 days of invoice date: a. January 1st, 2025 b. July 1st, 2025 A lump sum payment of remainder balance of Total Event Fee can be made at any time with no penalty. (b) Late Payments: All payments due under this Agreement will be considered late and in arrears if not paid within ten (10) days of the due dates specified in Paragraph 1(a) and will become subject to a late penalty fee of 2.5% of the balance owed plus interest calculated at the annualized rate of 18% per annum, or 1.5% compounded monthly, or the maximum allowed by law. (c) Tools to be Provided by Client: Client agrees to provide all tools, information and documentation that may be required by the Company to effectively perform said responsibilities in connection with the performance of event services. (d) Travel Expenses: Client agrees to reimburse Company for travel expenses incurred by Company on Client’s behalf. These expenses include the following: airfare, transportation, all meals during the travel period and hotel (up to 2 nights). Both Client and Company will agree to the travel expenses prior to commencement. Company agrees to provide Client with a travel expense invoice, and Client agrees to make payment to Company within 60 days from the date of delivery of said travel expense invoice to Client. (e) Additional Client Duties: Client shall provide laptop, or other mechanism in which to project PowerPoint presentation materials, as well as a microphone and water for any in-person educational training events, at Client’s expense. 3. TERM This engagement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue through completion of the event services or cancellation by either party in accordance with paragraph 4. 4. CANCELLATION Client may cancel this Agreement for any reason by providing 30 days written notice to the Company. The Company will provide a 50% refund of the total Event Fee to Client, if cancellation is communicated to the Company within 30 days of the End of Subscription period. Client will not provide any refund to Page 355 of 1086 BLUE PEAK CONSULTING Client if cancellation is communicated to the Company in less than 30 days of the End of Subscription Period. Cancellation of this Agreement by Client will not extinguish Client’s obligation to pay the travel expenses specified in Paragraph 2(d) and incurred by Company prior to the cancellation date. Company may cancel this Agreement at any time for any reason by providing written notice to Client. In the event that Company cancels this Agreement, Company will provide a full refund of the Event Fee paid. 5. NO GUARANTEES Company cannot guarantee the outcome of event services and Company’s comments about the outcome are expressions of opinion only. Company makes no guarantees other than that the services described in Paragraph 1(a) shall be provided to Client in accordance with the terms of this agreement. Client acknowledges that Company cannot guarantee any results for event services and such outcomes are based on subjective factors that cannot be controlled by Company. 6. CONFIDENTIALITY (a) Client Information: Any and all Client information and data of a confidential nature, including but not limited to any and all design, creative, marketing, sales, operating, performance, know how, business and process information (hereinafter referred to as “Confidential Information”), shall be treated by Company in the strictest confidence and not disclosed to third parties or used by Company for any purpose other than for providing Client with the services specified hereunder without Client’s express written consent. Confidential Information shall not include any information which (a) becomes available to the public through no breach of confidentiality by Company, (b) was in Company’s possession prior to receipt from the disclosure, (c) is received by Company independently from a third party free to disclose such information, or (d) is independently developed by Company without use of the Client’s Confidential Information. Upon request, Company hereto will promptly return or destroy all documents containing Confidential Information and delete all electronic records of or containing the same. 7. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS (a) Independent Contractor Relationship: This Agreement shall not render Company an employee, partner, agent of or joint venturer with the Client for any purpose. Company is and will remain an independent contractor in its relationship to the Client. Company is or remains open to conducting similar tasks or activities for entities other than the Client and holds itself out to the public to be a separate business entity. Company shall retain sole and absolute discretion in the manner and means of carrying out the activities and responsibilities under this Agreement. Company shall be responsible to the ownership and management of the Client, but Company will not be required to follow or establish a regular or daily work schedule. Company will not rely solely on the equipment or offices of Client for completion of tasks and duties set forth pursuant to this Agreement. Any advice given to Company regarding services performed for the Client shall be considered a suggestion only, not an instruction. Client retains the right to inspect, stop or alter the work of Company to assure its conformity with this Agreement and Client needs. Company and Client agree to conform to any and all IRS tests necessary to establish and demonstrate the independent contractor relationship between Client and Company. Page 356 of 1086 BLUE PEAK CONSULTING (b) Taxes & Benefits: Company will be responsible for filing its own tax returns and to pay taxes in accordance with all provisions of applicable Federal and State law. Client shall not be responsible for withholding taxes with respect to Company’s compensation. Company shall have no claim against Client for vacation pay, sick leave, retirement benefits, social security, worker’s compensation, health or disability benefits, unemployment insurance benefits or employee benefits of any kind. 8. LIMITED LICENSE The Company hereby grants to Client a limited license to use Company’s name, photograph, and likeness in, and in connection with advertising and promotional materials to promote this singular event. The Company also grants the Client a limited license to record Client’s Event and use the audio and/or video recording of the Event after the event for any purpose, provided that attribution of the content of the video is given to Company and no derivative works are created therefrom without prior written consent of the Company. 9. FORCE MAJEURE Neither party is liable for failure or delay in performance of the party's obligations under said agreement if such failure or delay in performance is as a result of causes and/or circumstances beyond the parties reasonable control and without its fault or negligence, including but not limited to accident, illness, Acts of God (including fire, flood, earthquake, storm, hurricane, or other natural disaster) or of the Public Enemy, acts of war, acts of the government in its sovereign capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, unusually severe weather, terrorist activities, nationalization, government sanction, blockage, embargo, labor dispute, strike, lockout or interruption or failure of electricity or telephone service. Should any such occurrence impede or delay travel and execution of any obligation under said agreement, every reasonable effort will be made by both parties to mitigate, modify or alter said agreement as to meet their stated and agreed upon obligations. No party is entitled to terminate this Agreement under Paragraph 3 (Term) in such circumstances, except by mutual consent and agreement in writing pursuant to the Force Majeure provisions. If a party asserts Force Majeure as an excuse for failure to perform the party's obligation, then the nonperforming party must prove that the party took reasonable steps to minimize delay or damages caused by foreseeable events, that the party substantially fulfilled all non-excused obligations, and that the other party was timely notified of the likelihood or actual occurrence of an event described in in this Paragraph 10. Should Force Majeure render the need for Company's services null and void, each party to this contract agrees to terminate the contract amicably and bear their own expenses incurred to date unless otherwise indicated or specified. 10. WARRANTIES Page 357 of 1086 BLUE PEAK CONSULTING (a) Company’s Warranties: Company represents, warrants and covenants that Company has full authority to enter into this Agreement and that all of the services, will be rendered using sound, professional practices and in a competent and professional manner by knowledgeable and qualified personnel. (b) Client’s Warranties: Client represents, warrants and covenants that Client has full authority to enter into this Agreement and has or will obtain, during all times relevant hereunder, all of the necessary consents, rights, licenses, clearances, releases or other permissions to lawfully consummate the transactions and lawfully discharge, in all material respects, each and every of Client’s obligations or duties set forth hereunder, whether performance is due now or hereafter during the Term. (c) EXCEPT FOR THE EXPRESS WARRANTIES PROVIDED THROUGHOUT THIS AGREEMENT, NEITHER PARTY MAKES ANY OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. 11. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY With regard to the services to be performed by the Company pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, the Company shall not be liable to Client, or to anyone who may claim any right due to any relationship with Client, for any acts or omissions in the performance of services on the part of the Company or on the part of the agents or employees of the Company, except when said acts or omissions of the Company are due to willful misconduct or gross negligence. The services provided by Blue Peak Consulting LLC DO NOT create a doctor-patient or therapist-patient relationship. Information provided DOES NOT create a doctor-patient or healthcare practitioner-patient relationship between you and Blue Peak Consulting LLC or its personnel. 12. EFFECT OF HEADINGS The subject headings of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Agreement are included for convenience only and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of any of its provisions. 13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; MODIFICATION; WAIVER This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter contained in it and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations, and understandings of the parties. No supplement, modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing by all the parties. No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed, or shall constitute, a waiver of any other provision, whether or not similar, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver. No waiver shall be binding unless executed in writing by the party making the waiver. 14. NEUTRAL CONSTRUCTION This Agreement was prepared by Company and/or Company’s legal counsel. It is expressly understood and agreed that this Agreement shall not be construed against Company merely because it was prepared Page 358 of 1086 BLUE PEAK CONSULTING by its counsel; rather, each provision of this Agreement shall be construed in a manner which is fair to both parties. 15. COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 16. ASSIGNMENT This Agreement shall be binding on, and shall inure to the benefit of, the parties to it and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors, and assigns; provided, however, that Client may not assign any of its rights under this Agreement, except to a wholly owned subsidiary entity of Client. No such assignment by Client to its wholly owned subsidiary shall relieve Client of any of its obligations or duties under this Agreement. The Company may assign its rights under this Agreement and make use of third party independent contractors to provide services only if mutually agreed upon by both Company and Client. 17. NOTICES All notices, requests, demands, and other communications under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given on the date of service if served personally on the party to whom notice is to be given, or on the day after mailing if mailed to the party to whom notice is to be given, by first class mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid, and properly addressed as follows: To Company at: Blue Peak Consulting: 1640 Hampshire Ave N., Golden Valley, MN 55427 To Client at: Edina Fire Department, 6250 Tracy Ave, Edina, MN 55436 Any party may change its address for purposes of this paragraph by giving the other parties written notice of the new address in the manner set forth above. 18. GOVERNING LAW; VENUE; MEDIATION; ARBITRATION This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the State of Minnesota as applied to contracts that are executed and performed entirely in Minnesota. The exclusive venue for any court proceeding based on or arising out of this Agreement shall be Ramsey County, Minnesota. The parties agree to attempt to resolve any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement by mediation, which shall be conducted under the then current mediation procedures of The CPR Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution or any other procedure upon which the parties may agree. The parties further agree that their respective good faith participation in mediation is a condition precedent to pursuing any other available legal or equitable remedy, arbitration, or other dispute resolution procedures. If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute in mediation, the dispute shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Page 359 of 1086 BLUE PEAK CONSULTING Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) shall be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 19. RECOVERY OF LITIGATION EXPENSES If any legal action or any arbitration or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement, or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresent in connection with any of the provisions of this Agreement, the successful or prevailing party or parties shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which it or they may be entitled. 20. SEVERABILITY If any term, provision, covenant, or condition of this Agreement is held by an arbitrator or court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the rest of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated. 21. SIGNATURES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have duly executed it on the day and year first above written. Blue Peak Consulting Edina Fire Department Signed: ____________________________________ Name: Margaret Gavian Title: Owner Date: _____________________________ Signed: ____________________________________ Name: _____________________________________ Title: _______________________________________ Date: ______________________________________ Page 360 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.14 Prepared By: Addison Lewis, Community Development Coordinator Item Type: Other Department: Community Development Item Title: Approve First Amendment of Antenna Lease Agreement Action Requested: Approve First Amendment of Antenna Lease Agreement. Information/Background: T-Mobile (formerly Sprint) leases antenna space on the City's tower at Fire Station 1, 6250 Tracy Ave. The agreement was originally entered into on October 2, 2000. It is set to expire at the end of 2025. The proposed lease amendment was prepared by the City Attorney's office and would extend the lease under the existing terms for four additional five-year renewal terms beginning on January 1, 2026. The proposed lease amendment is attached. Resources/Financial Impacts: Financial Impact: The City will collect $37,324 per year with rent increasing at each 5-year renewal term by the greater of 20% or the increase in the Consumer Price Index. Relationship to City Policies: None Supporting Documentation: 1. First Amendment of Antenna Lease Agreement Page 361 of 1086 TMO Site ID: MS14XC380/A1P0005A TMO Lease ID: 1546065 1 FIRST AMENDMENT OF ANTENNA LEASE AGREEMENT This FIRST AMENDMENT OF ANTENNA LEASE AGREEMENT (“First Amendment”) dated as of the day of , 202 , by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“Landlord”) and SPRINT SPECTRUM REALTY COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (formerly a limited partnership) (“Tenant”), successor-in-interest to Sprint Spectrum L.P. (Landlord and Tenant being collectively referred to herein as the “Parties”). RECITALS WHEREAS, Landlord is the owner of certain property located at 6250 Tracy Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55436, as legally described in Exhibit “A” to the Antenna Lease Agreement; and WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant (or its predecessors-in-interest) entered into that certain Tracy Avenue Site Lease Agreement dated October 2, 2000 (“Lease”); and WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant desire to amend the terms of the Lease to extend the term thereof and to otherwise modify the Lease as expressly provided herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt, adequacy, and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated into this First Amendment as though they were set forth in the body of this First Amendment. All of the definitions set forth in the Recitals shall have the meaning set forth in the Lease, unless the definitions contained in this First Amendment have a different meaning in which event the definitions shall have the meaning set forth herein. 2. Renewal Terms. From and after the Effective Date of this First Amendment, the following is added as a new paragraph: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Lease or this First Amendment, the Parties agree the Lease originally commenced on October 2, 2000 and, without giving effect to the terms of this First Amendment, but assuming the exercise by Lessee of all remaining renewal options in the Lease (each an “Existing Renewal Term” and, collectively, the “Existing Renewal Terms”), the Lease is otherwise scheduled to expire on December 31, 2025. Effective January 1, 2026 (“Effective Date”) the Lease is amended to provide Lessee with the option to extend the term of the Lease for each of four (4) additional five (5) year renewal terms beginning on January 1, 2026 (each a “New Renewal Term” and, collectively, the “New Renewal Terms”). The term TMO Signatory Level: L07/SL07 NLG-104214 Docusign Envelope ID: 3BB7CF8F-7D1A-4F8C-9CA4-E6BC3B3B3439 Page 362 of 1086 TMO Site ID: MS14XC380/A1P0005A TMO Lease ID: 1546065 2 “Renewal Term” shall mean, collectively, the Existing Renewal Term(s) and the New Renewal Term(s). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Lease, all Renewal Terms shall automatically renew unless Lessee notifies Lessor in writing that Lessee elects not to renew the Lease at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the Renewal Term. 3. Rent. From and after the Effective Date of this First Amendment, the Parties hereby agree that the current Section 2 (a) of the Lease is deleted in its entirety and the following shall apply: Amount, Adjustments. As consideration for this Lease, Tenant shall pay to the Landlord Rent in the amount of Thirty-Seven Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Four and 80/100 $37,324.80 per year for the initial 5-year New Renewal Term. Tenant agrees the annual rental amount will continue to be increased during each new 5 year lease term by the greater of: (a) twenty percent (20%) of the previous 5 year lease term rental, or (b) by an amount equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) during the previous 5 year lease term. The CPI shall mean the “Consumer Price Index – for All Urban Consumers, All Cities, All Items (1984 = 100)” as published by the United States Department of Labor Statistics, or if such index shall be discontinued, the successor index, or if there shall be no successor index, such comparable index as mutually agreed upon by the parties. To determine the lease term rental increase to be paid by Tenant under a CPI adjuster, the monthly rental for the previous 5 year term shall be multiplied by a percentage figure computed from a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the CPI for the most recently available quarter, and the denominator of which shall be the CPI for the corresponding quarter five years earlier. Such fraction shall be converted to a percentage equivalent. The resulting percentage figure shall be multiplied by the previous lease term’s rent (annualized for the first year, see Section 4 below). Where duplicate Rent would occur, a credit shall be taken by Tenant for any prepayment of duplicate Rent paid by Tenant. 4. Access. From and after the Effective Date of this First Amendment, Section 5 (k) (Access) shall be changed by adding the following sentence at the end of the Section: Tenant’s overnight use of marked parking spaces at the Property requires pre-approval from a site representative (i.e. the Fire Chief or designee). 5. Notices. From and after the Effective Date of this First Amendment, Section 22 (Notices) shall be changed by removing the current address for Tenant and Business Law Group and inserting the following: If to Tenant, to: T-Mobile USA, Inc. 12920 SE 38th Street Bellevue, WA 98006 Attn: Lease Compliance/MS14XC830/A1P0005A 6. Effective Date. This First Amendment shall be effective on the date that the Landlord executes this Amendment. TMO Signatory Level: L07/SL07 NLG-104214 Docusign Envelope ID: 3BB7CF8F-7D1A-4F8C-9CA4-E6BC3B3B3439 Page 363 of 1086 TMO Site ID: MS14XC380/A1P0005A TMO Lease ID: 1546065 3 7. Complete Amendment. This First Amendment supersedes all prior discussions and negotiations and contains all agreements and understandings between the Tenant and Landlord. 8. Lease Terms. Except as specifically modified or amended by this First Amendment, the Landlord and Tenant agree that all of the terms and conditions of the Lease, are in full force and effect and remain unmodified, except as modified and amended by this First Amendment and the parties hereby ratify and reaffirm the terms and conditions of the Lease, and agree to perform and comply with the same. In the event of a conflict between any term or provision of the Lease, and this First Amendment, the terms and provisions of this First Amendment shall control. In addition, except as otherwise stated in this First Amendment, all initially capitalized terms will have the same respective defined meaning stated in the Lease. 9. Governing Law. This First Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 10. Counterparts. This First Amendment may be signed in counterparts by the Parties hereto each of which counterparts shall be considered an original. SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE TMO Signatory Level: L07/SL07 NLG-104214 Docusign Envelope ID: 3BB7CF8F-7D1A-4F8C-9CA4-E6BC3B3B3439 Page 364 of 1086 TMO Site ID: MS14XC380/A1P0005A TMO Lease ID: 1546065 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this First Amendment the day and year first above written. TENANT: SPRINT SPECTRUM REALTY COMPANY LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Date: _________________, 20__. BY:_________________________________ Name:_______________________________ Its:__________________________________ LANDLORD: CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation BY:________________________________ James Hovland Its: Mayor Date: _________________, 20__. BY:________________________________ Scott Neal Its: City Manager TMO Signatory Level: L07/SL07 NLG-104214 Docusign Envelope ID: 3BB7CF8F-7D1A-4F8C-9CA4-E6BC3B3B3439 Elisabeth Boyer 12/10/2024 Sr. Manager, Technology Sourcing Page 365 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.15 Prepared By: Scott Neal, City Manager Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Administration Item Title: Approve Contract for Government Relations Services for the 2025 Legislative Session Representation Action Requested: Approve contract for Government Relations Services for the 2025 Legislative Session Representation. Information/Background: The City has retained Messerli & Kramer, P.A., (M&K) for state legislative government relations services for the past four years. Approval of the attached contract will continue that relationship for 2025. M&K has assigned Katy Sen to handle our client needs. She has been successful in helping secure bonding bill funding for an expansion of the South Metro Public Safety Training Center in 2020 and a local options sales and use tax referendum for the City in 2021. I look forward to working with Katy on advancing the City’s state legislative platform in 2025. The funding for this contract is included in the 2025 budget. I request the Council approve this motion as requested. Supporting Documentation: 1. Messerli Kramer Contract 2025 2. 2024 Government Relations Client List 3. Conflict of Interest Policy 2.2.23 Page 366 of 1086 MESSERLI & KRAMER, P.A. and CITY OF EDINA Contract for Government Relations Services 2025 Legislative Session Representation This contract for the provision of government relations services is entered into between Messerli & Kramer P.A. and the City of Edina. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED During the period January 1, 2025 through December 31, 2025, Messerli and Kramer will provide government affairs services on behalf of the City of Edina for items included on the City’s 2025 Legislative Platform. Katy Sen will be lead lobbyist from Messerli and Kramer. LEGISLATIVE SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED Lobbying. Messerli & Kramer will provide legislative lobbying for the City of Edina on items included on the City’s Legislative Platform. This includes monitoring bill introductions; monitoring hearings of interest to the City; drafting of bills; requesting bill hearings; lobbying key legislators and executive branch staff. The Firm will provide advice on strategy and process to represent the interests of the City at the Legislature. Liaison with State Government Officials. Messerli and Kramer will facilitate meetings with the Governor’s Office and other members of the executive branch as needed. BUDGET For legislative services as outlined above related to the City of Edina, for the term of the contract, Messerli & Kramer will charge a retainer of $56,500. This fee is payable in quarterly payments of $14,125 due in January, April, July, and October. Invoices will be sent quarterly and payments will be due upon receipt. Page 367 of 1086 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Together with this contract we have included a copy of Messerli & Kramer's Conflict of Interest policy and a list of current governmental relations clients. Included are the procedures that will follow should a conflict of interest arise. Once the City passes the 2025 Legislative Platform, Messerli Kramer will review to ensure there are no conflicts. AMENDMENTS Amendments to this contract may be made upon the request of either party and upon their mutual consent of the same. TERMINATION This contract may be terminated by either party upon 30 days written notice to the other party. This contract is entered into on the ___________ day of _________________ 2024 by ______________________ _________________________ Katy Sen Scott Neal Lobbyist Principal City Manager Messerli & Kramer, P.A. City of Edina Page 368 of 1086 MESSERLI KRAMER Abbott Laboratories Action Now Initiative, LLC Alliance for Automotive Innovation Alliance for Responsible Consumer Legal Funding (ARC) AMAROK American Swedish Institute Animal Humane Society CB Gear MN City of Bloomington City of Edina City of Inver Grove Heights City of Saint Paul Consumer Data Industry Association Delaware North Diageo North America Ecolab Great River Passage Conservancy Haleon Hennepin County Hennepin County Medical Center Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA) I-494 Corridor Commission Medical Alley Association METRC Minnesota Contractor Coalition Minnesota Defense Lawyers Association Minnesota Firefighter Initiative (MnFire) Minnesota Society of CPAs Minnesota Sports and Events Minnesota Twins Baseball Club Minnesota Valley Transit Authority Minnesota Zoo North American Council on Adoptable Children Northside Economic Opportunity Network Native American Community Clinic Pediatric Home Service Reproductive Health Alliance Shipt Takeda Pharmaceuticals US Bancorp 2024 GOVERNMENT RELATIONS CLIENT LIST Page 369 of 1086 MESSERLI | KRAMER Messerli & Kramer P.A. is aware that conflicts between clients can negatively impact their legislative programs. We assume the responsibility to examine the issues presented by any potential clients for conflict with existing client legislative initiatives. To that end, we have developed a Conflicts of Interest Policy which we include as part of all client representation agreements. It is our belief that most conflicts can be avoided through a commitment to early identification of issues and by notification of clients. Conflicts of Interest Policy Messerli & Kramer P.A. has an affirmative obligation to promptly detect and immediately report any potential conflict between the legislative objectives of its clients. Legislative clients also have an affirmative responsibility to detect potential conflicts and notify Messerli & Kramer P.A. regarding them. A conflict of interest will be deemed to exist whenever either a legislative client or the firm determines there is a conflict. Prospective clients are advised to review the aforementioned firm profile of current clients. We make every attempt to identify any potential conflict of interest with existing clients prior to being retained by a new legislative client. This process includes a full discussion within our Government Relations Department and disclosure of the potential conflict issues to existing legislative clients who may be affected. If any significant conflict becomes apparent that cannot be resolved at this stage, the firm will decline the new representation absent client consent. If a conflict of interest arises between two or more existing legislative clients, the following guidelines will apply: 1.An attempt will be made to resolve or compromise the conflict between the clients. A compromise must be agreed to by all affected clients. 2.If a client elects to withdraw the conflicting issue from its legislative program, the conflict of interest will be considered resolved. 3.If the conflict is not resolved by a client's withdrawal of the issue or mutual compromise of the conflicting points of view, Messerli & Kramer P.A. must withdraw from representation of all clients on that particular legislative issue. Messerli & Kramer P.A. will contact appropriate parties to explain the conflict and the firm's withdrawal from the issue. 4.The client, with the firm's assistance, will be responsible for making their own arrangements for legislative representation on the issue giving rise to the conflict and withdrawal. Messerli & Kramer P.A. will renegotiate any retainer or contract agreement with an affected client to reflect the withdrawal. 5.If a pattern of conflicts develops between legislative clients, the Firm will evaluate the situation with the affected clients. The Firm will cease representation as necessary to eliminate any continuing conflict of interest and will explain the withdrawal to all affected parties. Page 370 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.16 Prepared By: MJ Lamon, Special Projects & Engagement Manager Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Administration Item Title: 2025 Board and Commission Reappointments Action Requested: Approve reappointments with terms ending March 1, 2028. Information/Background: Term expiration notices were sent to all individuals with terms expiring March 1, 2025. The following individuals expressed a willingness to be reappointed to their respective board or commission. Appointments will all be for a three- year term expiring 3/1/2028. All the regular members are eligible for reappointment with respect to term limits and attendance requirements. Arts and Culture Commission Caroline Byrd Jennifer Faeth Alana Zbaren Community Health Commission Nick Mattison Brenna Smithson Board of Appeal & Equalization Bob MacPhail Construction Board of Appeals - None Energy & Environment Commission Hilda Martinez Salgado Stephen Schima Heritage Preservation Commission Theresa Farrell-Strauss Shawn Jarvinen Parks & Recreation Commission Ericka Welsh Jamie Pfuhl Planning Commission Clare Hahneman Jimmy Bennett Transportation Commission Bethany Olson Staff review attendance throughout the year to ensure requirements are achieved and advise individuals when attendance thresholds are not met. At times there are circumstances which impact individuals meeting the requirement. Typical exceptions include religious observances, family emergencies, life events, or military service. Staff recommends City Council reappoint the following individuals who did not meet the 75% attendance threshold back into their current seat: Adam Rosen (Transportation Commission), Ukasha Dakane (Energy & Environment Commission), Chris Garazatua (Parks & Recreation Commission). After making reappointments, the following vacancies will exist: Arts & Culture Commission (0), Board of Appeals & Equalization (1), Community Health Commission (1), Construction Board of Appeals (1), Energy & Environment Commission (0), Heritage Preservation Commission (1), Parks & Recreation Commission (2), Planning Commission (1), and Transportation Commission (2). Supporting Documentation: None Page 371 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.17 Prepared By: Kari Sinning, Deputy City Clerk Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Administration Item Title: Approve Temporary Intoxicating On-Sale Liquor License for Northwest Tonka Lions Club Action Requested: Approve Temporary Intoxicating On-Sale Liquor License for Northwest Tonka Lions Club. Information/Background: Northwest Tonka Lions Club, a service club organization based in Mound, MN, applied for a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for a charity fundraiser for the Westonka Food Shelf on March 1, 2025, to be held at The Nerdery, 7700 France Ave. S., Suite #205. Northwest Tonka Lions Club submitted the necessary applications and documentation and paid the applicable fee. They have met the requirements for a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating License per City Code and State Statutes. There have been no problems with any previous temporary licenses issued to Northwest Tonka Lions Club. Blue Line Security Solutions will provide security for this event. Supporting Documentation: None Page 372 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.18 Prepared By: Kari Sinning, Deputy City Clerk Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Administration Item Title: Approve New On-Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License for Fired Up Pizzeria Inc., dba Fired Up Pizzeria Action Requested: Approve new On-Sale Wine and On-Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor Licenses for Fired Up Pizzeria Inc., dba Fired Up Pizzeria Information/Background: Fired Up Pizzeria Inc., dba Fired Up Pizzeria, located at 7531 France Ave. S., applied for On-Sale Wine and 3.2 Malt Liquor Licenses. The application complies with City Code requirements. A background investigation summary completed by the Police Department is attached and staff recommends approval. Supporting Documentation: 1. Fired Up Pizzeria Background Summary Page 373 of 1086 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION SUMMARY ON-SALE WINE AND ON-SALE 3.2 LIQUOR LICENSE Establishment: License: Fired Up Pizzeria, INC: Fired Up Pizzeria On-Sale Wine and On-Sale 3.2 Liquor License In December of 2024, the Edina Police Department began a background investigation relating to a City of Edina application for an On-Sale Wine and On-Sale 3.2 Intoxicating Liquor License. The application was submitted by Fired Up Pizzeria, INC: Fired Up Pizzeria. Fired Up Pizzeria, INC: Fire Up Pizzeria will operate from 7531 France Ave. S., Edina. Fired Up Pizzeria INC: Fired Up Pizzeria is authorized to do business in Minnesota and is registered with the State of Minnesota. Fired Up Pizzeria INC: Fired Up Pizzeria is currently active and in good standing with the Minnesota Secretary of State. Fired Up Pizzeria, INC: Fired Up Pizzeria and/or its representatives are aware of the City ofEdina's requirement relating to employee alcohol awareness training. The training will be completed within 90 days of the liquor license issuance. Owners/Partners/Members: Fired Up Pizzeria, INC: Fired Up Pizzeria: Arunpal Singh Mand Eden Prairie, MN The owners/partners/members have been investigated. Nothing of note was located. Checks were made with the following agencies: NCIC MINCIS Hennepin County Minnesota Secretary of State Minnesota Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division Sgt. David Boosalis #190 Page 374 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 6.19 Prepared By: Sharon Allison, City Clerk Item Type: Ordinance Department: Administration Item Title: Summary Publications for Ordinance Nos. 2024-08 and 2024-09 Action Requested: Approve summary publication for Ordinance No. 2024-08 amendment for Cannabis Uses and Ordinance No. 2024-09 amendment for Regulation of Cannabis Businesses. Information/Background: State Statute requires that the City publish all approved ordinances within 45 days of approval in its official newspaper. State Statute allows cities to choose to publish a summary of a complete public notice. This is a cost effective option for lengthy ordinances. Supporting Documentation: 1. Summary Publication Ordinance No. 2024-08 Cannabis Uses 2. Summary Publication Ordinance No. 2024-09 Cannabis Business Registration Page 375 of 1086 CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO. 2024-08 AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING CANNABIS USES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, on November 19, 2024, Ordinance No. 2024-08 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, due to the lengthy nature of Ordinance No. 2024-08, the following summary of the ordinance has been prepared for publication and approved by the City Council as authorized by state law. The ordinance makes cannabis retailers a permitted use in the Planned Commercial Districts 1, 2, and 3, Mixed Development District 6 and any Planned Unit Development that allows the uses in the Planned Commercial Districts. It also makes cannabis retailers a conditionally permitted use in the Mixed Development Districts 3, 4, and 5. This is the same as how tobacco and liquor stores are zoned. Additionally, the ordinance allows for businesses engaged in the cultivation, delivery, manufacturing, processing, testing, transportation, and wholesaling of cannabis products as a permitted use in the Planned Industrial District. All operations must take place within an enclosed building. Businesses issued a microbusiness license from the State may also offer on-site consumption of edible cannabis products if it is accessory to a licensed cannabis business in the Planned Industrial District. The ordinance adds new definitions to the zoning chapter as needed and clarifies parking requirements for certain uses. The complete ordinance is available by email by contacting Sharon Allison at sallison@EdinaMN.gov or calling 952-826-0408. APPROVED for summary publication by the City Council this 17th day of December 2024. By order of the Edina City Council Sharon Allison City Clerk Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on _____ Send one affidavit of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk Page 376 of 1086 CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO. 2024-09 AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING REGULATION OF CANNABIS BUSINESSES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, on November 19, 2024, Ordinance No. 2024-09 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, due to the lengthy nature of Ordinance No. 2024-09, the following summary of the ordinance has been prepared for publication and approved by the City Council as authorized by state law. Ordinance 2024-09 establishes City of Edina Adult Use Cannabis Registration requirements and processes for adult-use cannabis businesses to operate in the City. Adult-use cannabis was legalized by the Minnesota Legislature in 2023. Adult-use cannabis business licensing will not begin until 2025 and includes a local jurisdiction registration requirement in addition to the State licensing requirement. In early 2025, the State of Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management will begin licensing cannabis businesses, and the City of Edina will provide the local registration and compliance process as required by legislation. The complete ordinance is available by email by contacting Sharon Allison at sallison@EdinaMN.gov or calling 952-826-0408. APPROVED for summary publication by the City Council this 17th day of December 2024. By order of the Edina City Council Sharon Allison City Clerk Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on _____ Send one affidavit of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk Page 377 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Information Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 7.1 Prepared By: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Item Type: Other Department: Engineering Item Title: Tree Recognition Campaign Awards Action Requested: None, information only. Information/Background: The Energy and Environment Commission's (EEC) 2024 Work Plan included a new initiative called the Tree Recognition Campaign to recognize and celebrate Edina's tree canopy. Twenty-three trees were nominated for recognition and nine nominees were selected for recognition. The presentation is a review of the campaign and recognition of the selected awardees. EEC's Vice Chair John Haugen is presenting the awards. Resources/Financial Impacts: None. Relationship to City Policies: • Energy and Environment Commission 2024 Workplan Supporting Documentation: 1. 2024 Tree Recognition Campaign Awards Page 378 of 1086 2024 Tree Recognition Campaign Awardees Award Tree Species Location Best Oak Bur Oak 4916 Arden Ave Best Oak Oak 5412 York Ave Best Coniferous Tree White Pine 5724 Code Avenue Best City Tree Cottonwood Weber Park Best Tree Story Crab Apple York Park Biodiversity Award Ginkgo Arneson Acres Park Fall Colors Award Maple 6608 Gleason Terrace Climbing Tree Award Silver Maple Kojetin Park Fullest Canopy Award Silver Maple 4917 Arden Avenue Honorable Mention - Mature Tree Oak 4509 Oxford Ave. Honorable Mention - Mature Tree Bur Oak 5400 Park Place Honorable Mention - Mature Tree Bur Oak 4609 Bruce Ave Honorable Mention - Mature Tree Bur Oak 6126 Loch Moor Dr Honorable Mention - Mature Tree Bur Oak W 70th and Cahil Honorable Mention - Mature Tree White Oak 4509 Oxford Ave Honorable Mention - Mature Tree Oak 4716 Townes Rd Honorable Mention - Mature Tree Sugar Maple 4509 Oxford Ave. Honorable Mention - Mature Tree Unknown 6100 Kellogg Ave Honorable Mention - Young Tree Swamp White Oak Weber Park Honorable Mention - Young Tree Green Ash Edina Promenade Honorable Mention - Young Tree Dawn Redwood Arneson Acres Park Honorable Mention - Young Tree American Pawpaw 5717 Deville Dr Honorable Mention - Young Tree Freeman Maple 5410 York Ave Page 379 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 8.1 Prepared By: Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner Item Type: Public Hearing Department: Community Development Item Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial of a Variance Request at 5605 McGuire Road Action Requested: Motion to close the in-person public hearing and keep the online public input open until Sunday, December 29, 2024 and continue action of the item to the January 7, 2025 Council meeting. Information/Background: Elizabeth and Scott Joing are appealing the Planning Commission's November 13, 5 to 3 denial votes of a variance from Sec. 36-437 of the Edina City Code to allow a 2.8% or a 627.5 sq. ft variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface allowed for a 660 sq. ft. surface increase on their property to construct a paver patio, walk, steps, and stepping stones at 5605 McGuire Road. Resources/Financial Impacts: Relationship to City Policies: Supporting Documentation: 1. Appeal Letter 2. Resolution No. 2024-120 for Approval 3. Resolution No. 2024-120 for Denial 4. Staff Report to Planning Commission, Nov. 13, 2024 5. Planning Commission Minutes, Nov. 13, 2024 6. Site Location 7. Project Narrative 8. Engineering Memo, Nov. 8, 2024 9. Stormwater Management Plan, Sept. 19, 2024 10. Project Plans Page 380 of 1086 Edina City Council Members: My husband, Scott, and I are the owners of 5605 McGuire. We wish to appeal a recent decision by the Planning Commission that denied a variance request for our property. We are upset and discouraged by how the Planning Commission made its decision. They lost sight of the main issue, and instead offered personal opinions on what we have, what we need, or how to store and arrange items in our yard. They failed to adequately consider a unique reality of our property: our neighbors’ driveway crosses our lot and accounts for over 20% of our (not their) allowed hardscape coverage. Every aspect of our house, yard, and lot is both constrained by and in compliance with city codes and ordinances. In 2023, the city ordinance for hardscape coverage was changed. No longer are the types of hardscape considered; rather, each property is simply given a flat percentage allotment (50%). This new ordinance disproportionately affects our property in several key ways: •Our driveway: We have a long driveway, but the length of that driveway is completely dictated by city setback rules. Some homes in Edina have very short driveways. We happen to have a long one because the homes on our block are set back quite a ways from the street. We had no choice but to match that setback. Driveways were formerly not included in hardscape totals. They are now, however, so our particular property is more impacted than properties where the homes sit closer to the road. •Our pool deck: We added a pool to our property in 2019. A 4ft surrounding pool deck was required for safety by city code. We added a modest amount of additional patio space with that pool deck coverage, but we always planned to add more once we had the pool for a few years and could see how we really used the space. The required 4ft pool deck was formerly not included in hardscape totals, but now it is. •Our neighbors’ driveway: This is the unique reality of our property that makes a variance necessary. Two of our neighbors have a shared driveway that cuts across the lots of several homes along our block. This driveway, though private, is our neighbors’ only public street access. The span of their driveway that traverses our lot covers 2,574 square feet. Since driveways are now included in the new hardscape calculations, our particular property is disproportionately affected Page 381 of 1086 because our neighbors’ driveway accounts for 22.8% of our allotted hardscape coverage. Our neighbors’ driveway is the unique reality of our property that the Planning Commission failed to adequately consider in its decision to deny our variance request. That driveway cuts across our lot and yet is not at all ours. We neither use nor maintain it, but over 20% of our allowed hardscape coverage is consumed by it. We are looking for a variance to allow for only 2.9% of additional hardscape coverage. Without a variance, we are faced with an absurd choice: determining whether or not to dig up a portion of our neighbors’ street access in order to comply with a city ordinance. If a variance doesn’t apply in this situation, we can’t imagine when it would ever apply. We urge you to overrule the Planning Commission’s decision. We want to be able to move ahead with our project - to add value to our property, to plant a variety of new trees and plants on our lot, to increase our ability to continue to host family, friend, and community gatherings. We also want to continue to be good and considerate neighbors. Please approve our variance request and allow us to proceed. Scott and Elizabeth Joing 5605 McGuire Road Page 382 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-120 APPROVING AN IMPERVEOUS SURFACE VARIANCE FOR A NEW PATIO AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS, 5605 MCGUIRE ROAD. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 The project requires an impervious surface variance to install a sidewalk, a paver patio and steppingstones. 1.02 The property has a shared asphalt driveway crossing the back width of the lot. The improvements require a variance from the zoning requirement addressing impervious surface. The maximum impervious surface coverage allowed in the R-1 zoning district is 50% of the lot area. The property currently has 11,258 sq ft of surface coverage for a total of 49.9% of the lot area. The homeowner is proposing to increase surface coverage by 660 sq ft totaling 11,918 sq ft of coverage or 52.8% of the lot area. 1.03 Without the 2,574 sq ft driveway servicing neighbors, the property would be at 41.37% coverage and would allow an additional 971.57 square feet of hard surface. 1.04 The property address is 5605 McGuire Road and parcel identification number is: Lot: 007, Block: 006 LA BUENA VISTA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, 1.05 To accommodate the request, the following land use applications are requested: A 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft hard surface increase, at 5605 McGuire Road. The variance is to allow the installation of a sidewalk, a paver patio and steppingstones. 1.06 November 13th, 2024, the Planning Commission recommended Denial of the variance request. 1.07 On December 17th, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing on the variance request. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval of variance to allow a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required is based on the following findings: Page 383 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-120 Page 2 1. The proposed project meets the variance standards of Chapter 36. The proposed project meets the criteria to grant a 2.8% (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required. 2. The practical difficulty is caused by the exiting driveway access that services other properties and does not provide service to or is needed by the applicants. 3. The project presents an opportunity to correct the impact of driveway access along the back of the lot that is not used or needed by the property. The access driveway benefits neighboring property which is a practical difficulty that is unique and an extraordinary circumstance of the property. 4. The proposed project will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new improvements will be behind a fenced-in rear yard not visible from the front street and are at grade surface improvements that will not contribute to additional visible building coverage. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approve the variance to install a paver sidewalk, a paver patio and steppingstones at 5605 McGuire Road. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The Construction Plans must be consistent with the proposed survey and plans date stamped, October 15, 2024. 2. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the City Engineering memo dated November 8, 2024. 3. Compliance with the tree protection ordinance in coordination with the City Forrester. Page 384 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-120 Page 3 Adopted by the city council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on January 7, 2025. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of, January 7, 2025, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2025. _________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 385 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-120 DENYING AN IMPERVEOUS SURFACE VARIANCE FOR A NEW PATIO AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS, 5605 MCGUIRE ROAD. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 The project requires an impervious surface variance to install a sidewalk, a paver patio and steppingstones. 1.02 The property has a shared asphalt driveway crossing the back width of the lot. The improvements require a variance from the zoning requirement addressing impervious surface. The maximum impervious surface coverage allowed in the R-1 zoning district is 50% of the lot area. The property currently has 11,258 sq ft of surface coverage for a total of 49.9% of the lot area. The homeowner is proposing to increase surface coverage by 660 sq ft totaling 11,918 sq ft of coverage or 52.8% of the lot area. 1.03 Without the 2,574 sq ft driveway servicing neighbors, the property would be at 41.37% coverage and would allow an additional 971.57 square feet of hard surface. 1.04 The property address is 5605 McGuire Road and parcel identification number is: Lot: 007, Block: 006 LA BUENA VISTA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, 1.05 To accommodate the request, the following land use applications are requested: A 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft hard surface increase, at 5605 McGuire Road. The variance is to allow the installation of a sidewalk, a paver patio and steppingstones. 1.06 November 13th, 2024, the Planning Commission recommended Denial of the variance request. 1.07 On December 17th, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing on the variance request. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Deny a variance to allow a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required is based on the following findings: Page 386 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-120 Page 2 1. The proposed project does not meet the variance standards of Chapter 36 to grant a 2.8% (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required. The cumulative amount of proposed surface coverage is beyond 50% of the lot area and cannot be justified based on lot shape or size or other characteristics not found in other lots. 2. The proposal does not meet the standards for variance with no circumstances unique and specific to the lot. There are four other properties with the same driveway access crossing their lots that are subject to the same maximum coverage requirements. The property currently has reasonable use of the property including the single dwelling unit with an inground pool, sidewalk, driveway, shed, deck and patio. 3. The project does not correct the impact of the driveway’s hard surface along the back of the lot. Due to the proposed increase in coverage, the patio/improvements conflict with goals to limit coverage on properties and the policy change to protect half the lot area for open/uncovered space. 4. The proposed project will alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new improvements will cover over one half of the lot. The property owner’s situation is not unique with four other properties with the same circumstances that may require similar variances for improvements. Section 3. DENIAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, denies the 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), coverage variance to install a paver sidewalk, a paver patio and steppingstones at 5605 McGuire Road. Page 387 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-120 Page 3 Adopted by the city council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on January 7, 2025. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of, January 7, 2025, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2025. _________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 388 of 1086 The 22,581 square foot lot is located south of McGuire Road, is adjacent to single family homes and has a shared asphalt driveway crossing the back width of the property. The maximum impervious surface coverage allowed in the R-1 zoning district is 50% of the lot area. The property currently has 11,258 sq ft of surface coverage for a total of 49.9% of the lot area. The homeowner is proposing to increase surface coverage by 660 sq ft totaling 11,918 sq ft of coverage or 52.8% of the lot area. The applicant is requesting a variance to install a paver sidewalk, a paver patio and steppingstones. The property currently accommodates a house, porch, driveway, front walk, deck with steps, shed, patio, pool equipment pad, inground pool, and an additional driveway servicing three neighboring homes. Without the 2,574 sq ft driveway servicing neighbors, the property would be at 41.37% coverage and would allow an additional 971.57 square feet of hard surface. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes zoned R- 1 and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. November 13, 2024 Planning Commission Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner B-24-13, a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft surface increase, at 5605 McGuire Road. Information / Background: Page 389 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Existing Site Features The subject property was originally built in1956 and was torn down and rebuilt in 2015 complying with all zoning requirements at that time, (the hard surface maximum was amended into the code in 2023). The lot is 22,581 square feet in area and is located on the south side of McGuire Road, consisting of a two-story home with an attached three-car garage. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Forestry, Grading & Drainage The city’s Forester will conduct a full review of the tree plan at the time of a building permit application. The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments as attached in their memorandum. Compliance Table City Standard Proposed Surface coverage 50% (49.9% existing) *52.8% Surface coverage without driveway access surface included 50% (38.45% existing) 41.37% (allows an additional 971 sq ft) *Requires a variance PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issue •Is the proposed variance justified? No, staff does not believe the requested variance is justified. Page 390 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 3 Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively to grant a variance. The proposed variance will/will not: 1.The variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning standards, with exception of the impervious surface requirement. The reason for the variance request is due mostly to the extensive coverage caused by the driveway that bisects the property servicing neighboring properties. The driveway is included in the total surface area of the subject lot. An increase in surface area is not in harmony with the intent of the ordinance adopted in 2023. The intent of the ordinance is to maintain a balance of surface area and landscape area on residential properties. Criteria not met. 2.The variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides the property for Low Density Residential Use. The principal use of the property would still be as a single-family home and the property would remain zoned R-1 Criteria met. 3.There are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. The term “practical difficulties” means the following: i.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without a variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. “Practical difficulties” may include functional and aesthetic concerns. The property currently has reasonable use of the property including the single dwelling unit with an inground pool, sidewalk, driveway, shed, deck and patio. Criteria not met. ii.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Staff haven’t found there to be anything unique that would support over-building/increasing surface coverage on the lot. The shared driveway may not have been created by the homeowner; however, it consists of hard surface covering the lot so is therefore included in surface coverage calculations. The cumulative amount of proposed surface coverage is beyond 50% of the lot area and cannot be justified based on lot shape or size. The property is at 49.9% surface coverage currently; allowing it to increase beyond the ordinance limit may set up a precedent for other properties to claim similar encroachment circumstances as justification for increasing hard surfaces. Criteria not met. Page 391 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 4 iii.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The improvements will cover more than 50% of the lot area and will appear to be more than 50% given the driveway access to other properties is fenced off from the remainder of the subject lot and doesn’t appear to be part of the backyard. The fenced-in back yard appears smaller than it is and may seem more intensely covered with the proposed improvements. Granting variance may alter the character of the neighborhood by setting a precedence given there are four other properties that have the same driveway access crossing those properties who may also want to increase lot coverage beyond current limits. Criteria not met. Optional Actions A case can be made for approval and denial of this project. Below provides options for the Planning Commission to consider: Denial Deny the request for a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft surface increase, at 5605 McGuire Road. Denial is based on the following findings: 1.The proposal does not meet the standards for variance with no circumstances unique and specific to the lot. There are other properties that also have driveway access crossing their lots. The property currently has reasonable use of the property including the single dwelling unit with an inground pool, sidewalk, driveway, shed, deck and patio. A variance cannot be justified based on a unique feature specific to lot shape or size or other characteristics not found in other lots. 2. Due to the proposed increase in coverage, the patio/improvements conflict with the city’s goal to limit coverage on properties and the policy change to protect half of lot area for open/uncovered space. 3. The proposed project will alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The fenced-in back yard appears smaller than it is and may seem more intensely covered with the proposed improvements. The property owner’s situation is not unique with four other properties sharing the same circumstances that may require similar variances for improvements. Approval Approve the request for a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft surface increase, at 5605 McGuire Road. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The practical difficulty is caused by the exiting driveway access that services other properties and does not provide service to or is needed by the applicants. Page 392 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 5 2. A unique circumstance includes the amount of access driveway coverage that does not benefit the subject lot as compared with nearby properties to the south, so there is less opportunity for improvements on the subject property. Without the driveway, the lot could support an additional 971 sq ft of hard surface improvement. 3. The proposal would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new improvements will be behind a fenced-in rear yard not visible from the front street and are at grade surface improvements that will not contribute to additional visible building coverage. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Subject to plans and survey date stamped, October 15, 2024. 2. Subject to Engineering staff’s memo dated, November 2024. Staff Recommendation Staff cannot support the request given the property will exceed the surface coverage requirements recently adopted to address concerns of over-building on property. The intent of the ordinance is to maintain a balance of surface area and landscape area on residential properties. There appears to be nothing unique to the property or request to support exceeding coverage requirements of the lot that is contrary to that goal. An increase in surface area is not in harmony with the intent of the ordinance adopted in 2023 and could set a precedent for the four other properties also supporting the driveway access on their lots. The property currently has reasonable use with existing rear yard improvements: deck, patio, pool, etc. Staff cannot identify a unique circumstance and recommend denial of the variance request. Deadline for a city decision: February 13, 2025. Page 393 of 1086 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 1 of 4 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers November 13, 2024 I. Call To Order Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Alkire, Bornstein, Miranda, Padilla, Smith, Hahneman, Felt, Joncas, and Chair Bennett. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director; Kris Aaker, Assistant Planner; and Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Daye and Jha. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Bornstein moved to approve the agenda for November 13, 2024. Commissioner Padilla seconded the motion. Motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, October 30, 2024 Commissioner Alkire moved to approve the October 30, 2024, meeting minutes. Commissioner Hahnemann seconded the motion. Motion carried. V. Community Comment None. VI. Special Recognition None. VII. Public Hearings A. 5605 McGuire Road, Variance Request of 2.8% (627.5 sq ft) from the 50% Impervious Surface Requirement Assistant Planner Aaker presented the variance request. Staff recommends denial of the variance, as requested, subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission questions. Page 394 of 1086 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Josh Kohler, the landscape designer for the Southview Design project, addressed the Commission and answered questions. Public Hearing None. Commissioner Miranda moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hahnemann seconded the motion. Motion carried. The Commission discussed the variance request and staff recommendation of denial. Motion Commissioner Alkire moved that the Planning Commission recommend denial to the City Council of the variance request as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Padilla seconded the motion. The motion carried 5 ayes and 3 nays (Smith, Hahnemann, Bennett). The entire meeting discussion can be viewed on the official City website. B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and Site Plan with Variances – 6016 Vernon Avenue Director Teague presented the request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and Site Plan with Variances. Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, as requested, subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Ed Terhar, Stantec, remotely answered Commission questions. Mr. Jesse Hamer, Momentum Design Group, addressed the Commission and answered questions. Mr. Jake Schaeffer, 6024 Hanson Road, Edina, Station Pizza, addressed the Commission on peak-hour traffic concerns and building aesthetics. Public Hearing Mr. James Allen, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, addressed the Commission and indicated he was against this request. Page 395 of 1086 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 3 of 4 Mr. Matthew Peppers, 6004 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, addressed the Commission and said he did not favor this request. Ms. Barbara Bendor, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, addressed the Commission and indicated she did not favor this request. Ms. Mary Melander, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, addressed the Commission and explained she did not favor this request. Ms. Pam Allen, 6105 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, addressed the Commission with her concerns about the request. Ms. Gaye Christensen, 6116 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, addressed the Commission and expressed her opposition to the request. Mr. Tom Kohlbry, 6004 Kmart Drive, Edina, addressed the Commission and explained the neighborhood does not want this change. Ms. Mary Kenealy-Bredice, 6020 Kmart Drive, Edina, addressed the Commission and stated she was against this request. Mr. John Wellborn, 6008 Eden Prairie Road, addressed the Commission and opposed the request. Commissioner Felt moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Alkire seconded the motion. Motion carried. The Commission deliberated the request. Youth Commissioner Joncas left the meeting during deliberation. Motion Commissioner Hahnemann moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein, with changes to add the words “and housing.” Commissioner Smith seconded the motion. The motion carried. Commissioner Felt moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Rezoning, Site Plan, and Variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein, adding a recommendation to have the sidewalk as close to the property line as possible. Commissioner Padilla seconded the motion. Motion carried. The entire meeting discussion can be viewed on the official City website. VIII. Reports/Recommendations IX. Chair and Member Comments Received. Page 396 of 1086 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 4 of 4 X. Staff Comments Received. XI. Adjournment Commissioner Padilla moved to adjourn the November 13, 2024, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 10:24 PM. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried. Page 397 of 1086 © WSB & Associates 2013 Parcels November 7, 2024 Map Powered By DataFi / 1 in = 46 ft Page 398 of 1086 Page 399 of 1086 DATE: 11/8/2024 TO: Liz Olson – Administrative Support Specialist FROM: Ross Bintner, PE – Engineering Services Manager RE: 5605 McGuire Rd - Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, stormwater, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department. Plans reviewed included existing conditions survey dated 06/28/2024, site plan dated 07/09/2024, erosion and sediment control plan dated 09/20/24, and stormwater management plan dated 09/19/2024. Summary of Work The applicant proposes to construct a patio. The request is for a variance from the maximum 50% impervious surface requirement. Easements There is a utility easement along the south property line. It is not affected by this application. Grading and Drainage Site drains to Nine Mile Creek through City storm sewer. The patio adds approximately 721 square feet of new impervious area. It appears that the additional impervious will drain to private property. Stormwater Mitigation The project increases the impervious surfaces by ~721 sf and drains to a regional flooding area. Stormwater mitigation is required per building policy SP-003-E as it meets the following 3 conditions of a category 2 permit; 1. The addition of over 400 square feet of new impervious surface with a drainage path that is directed to private property. 2. A site that proposes that proposes greater than 50% impervious surface. 3. The continuation, addition or modification of previously permitted activities from the last five years, that when reviewed as a whole would trigger one or more of the above requirements. A preliminary stormwater management plan was reviewed and appears satisfactory. Final approval of stormwater management plan will be verified during final permit approval. If variance is approved, applicant must apply for a grading permit if no other permit is required. Floodplain Development The patio is not proposed within any regional or local floodplain boundaries. Erosion and Sediment Control A preliminary erosion and sediment control plan was reviewed and appears satisfactory. Final approval of erosion and sediment control plan will be verified during final permit approval. Street and Driveway Entrance N.A. Public Utilities N.A. Page 400 of 1086 Miscellaneous An updated Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit is required or documentation that one is not required. Page 401 of 1086 • STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Lot 7, Block 6, La Buena Vista 5605 Mcquire Road Edina, Minnesota September 19, 2024 Prepared By: DEMARC LAND SURVEYING 5 ENGINEERING Prepared For: Southview Design 2383 Pilot Knob Road St. Paul, MN, 55120 I hereby certify that this Plan, Specification or Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 'Jeffrey A Prasch, E Project Engineer 52706 09.19.24 License Number Date Page 402 of 1086 A Stormwater Management Plan 5605 Mcguire Road — Edina, MN September 19, 2024 Table of Contents Table of Contents i 1.0 Project Overview ii 2.0 Design Considerations ii 3.0 Rate Control ii Table 3.1 — Discharge Rate Summary ii 4.0 Volume Control iii Appendix A — Figures Figure 1 — Drainage Areas Existing Conditions Figure 2 — Drainage Areas Proposed Conditions Figure 3 — Precipitation Data Appendix B — Existing Conditions 10-Year Summary 1-6 Appendix C — Proposed Conditions 10-Year Summary 7-16 Appendix D — Soil Summary 1-3 i Page 403 of 1086 A Stormwater Management Plan 5605 Mcguire Road — Edina, MN September 19, 2024 1.0 Project Overview A new patio area is being proposed at 5605 McGuire Road in the City of Edina, Minnesota. This site is within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD). The current site is 0.52 acres with a residence, garage, shed, pool and driveway on the property. Existing residences surround the project site with the street to the north. The drainage patterns split the property with about half the site draining to the street and the rear yard draining to private property. The property does not drain to structural flooding issues. The existing drainage conditions are shown in Figure 1. The proposed improvements include a paver patio and associated steps, walk and walls. The improvements will increase the impervious area draining to private property by more than 400 sf. The proposed conditions will maintain similar drainage paths to the existing conditions. The proposed drainage is shown in Figure 2. 2.0 Design Considerations The City of Edina dictates the requirements for this site. The on-site stormwater system design is based on their guidelines. This property is located within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD); because the proposed improvements increase the impervious area by less than 50%, no demonstration of compliance with their stormwater requirements is required. The following design tools, methods, and considerations were used in the design of the on-site storm water system: Rainfall Distribution — MSE 24-hour Type Ill Rate and Volume Modeling Software — HydroCAD 10.20 Soil Conditions — Hydrologic Soil Group B based on web soil survey shown in Appendix D. Rainfall Data — NOAA Atlas 14 rainfall data as shown in Figure 3. 3.0 Rate Control The City of Edina manages rate control for this property. Their rule states that there will be no increase in peak rate to private property for the 10% annual probability event (NOAA Atlas 14, 10-year). Table 3.1 shows the existing and proposed runoff rates. Table 3.1 — Discharge Rate Summary Discharge Node Discharge Rate [cfs] 10-Year Storm Event Pre- Post- Private Property (2L) 0.99 0.98 Street (1L) 0.98 0.98 ii Page 404 of 1086 A Stormwater Management Plan 5605 Mcguire Road — Edina, MN September 19, 2024 4.0 Volume Control The City regulates the volume of water discharged from the site. The site does not drain to structural flooding issues per the City of Edina Engineering Department. Therefore, no volume control is required. iii Page 405 of 1086 Appendix A Figures Page 406 of 1086 FIGURE 1 0 30 6 LEGEND SUBCATCHMENT NUMBER A POND/CATCH BASIN NUMBER LINK NUMBER = REACH NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW (1) 0 E < z w 0 0 0 Q 0 Z z g P v-`12 15 SCALE IN FEET 09.19.24 MCGUIRE ROAD Page 407 of 1086 MCGUIRE ROAD LOT 8 14 1OT 0 wa< 1-0 0 z 0 L0 2 _1<ix_ r- 0 I-03 2 W 8 U.) U) 0 < cc z 0 NJ <a Z 111 — (/) 0 0- a 0 FIGURE 2 LEGEND SUBCATCHMENT NUMBER A POND/CATCH BASIN NUMBER 1L3 LINK NUMBER Ei REACH NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 30 60 SCALE IN FEET 09.19.24 Page 408 of 1086 NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Location name: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA* Latitude: 44.9121°, Longitude: -93.3572° Elevation: 969 ft** • source: ESRI Maps " source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES Sanja Perica, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic, Ishani Roy, Michael St. Laurent, Carl Trypaluk, Dale Unruh, Mchaet Yenta, Geolfery Bonnin NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF tabular I PF graphical I Maps & aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1 Duration Average recurrence Interval (years) 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 5-min 0.353 (0.285-0.442) 0.419 (0.338-0.525) 0.532 (0.428-0.668) 0.631 (0.504-0.796) 0.774 (0.600-1.01) 0.891 (0.673-1.18) 1.01 (0.737-1.37) 1.14 (0.795-1.58) 1.32 (0.883-1.87) 1.46 (0.949-2.09) 10-min 0.517 (0.417-0.647) 0.613 (0.495-0.768) 0.779 (0.626-0.979) 0.924 (0.738-1.16) 1.13 (0.879-1.48) 1.30 (0.985-1.73) 1.48 (1.08-2.00) 1.67 (1.16-2.32) 1.93 (1.29-2.74) 2.14 (1.39-3.07) 15-min 0.630 (0.509-0.789) 0.748 (0.603-0.937) 0.950 (0.784-1.19) 1.13 (0.900-1.42) 1.38 (1.07-1.81) 1.59 (1.20-2.10) 1.81 (1.32-2.44) 2.04 (1.42-2.82) 2.36 (1.58-3.34) 2.61 (1.69-3.74) 30-min 0.891 (0.720-1.12) 1.06 (0.859-1.34) 1.36 (1.10-1.71) 1.62 (1.30-2.05) 2.00 (1.55-2.62) 2.30 (1.74-3.05) 2.62 (1.91-3.54) 2.96 (2.06-4.09) 3.42 (2.29-4.85) 3.78 (2.46-5.43) 60-min 1.16 (0.938-1.46) 1.38 (1.12-1.74) 1.78 (1.44-2.24) 2.15 (1.72-2.71) 2.71 (2.11-3.58) 3.18 (2.41-4.23) 3.68 (2.69-5.01) 4.23 (2.96-5.89) 5.00 (3.36-7.14) 5.63 (3.66-8.08) 2-hr 1.43 (1.16-1.78) 1.70 (1.38-2.12) 2.21 (1.79-2.75) 2.68 (2.16-3.36) 3.42 (2.69-4.51) 4.05 (3.10-5.38) 4.74 (3.49-6.43) 5.50 (3.88-7.63) 6.59 (4.46-9.35) 7.48 (4.90-10.7) 3-hr 1.60 (1.30-1.98) 1.89 (1.54-2.34) 2.46 (2.00-3.05) 3.00 (2.43-3.75) 3.88 (3.08-5.12) 4.64 (3.57-6.16) 5.49 (4.07-7.44) 6.43 (4.57-8.91) 7.80 (5.32-11.1) 8.94 (5.88-12.7) 6-hr 1.88 (1.54-2.31) 2.21 (1.81-2.72) 2.86 (2.34-3.53) 3.51 (2.85-4.35) 4.56 (3.66-6.01) 5.50 (4.27-7.27) 6.54 (4.89-8.82) 7.71 (5.52-10.6) 9.42 (6.47-13.3) 10.8 (7.20-15.3) 12-hr 2.13 (1.76-2.60) 2.53 (2.09-3.09) 3.27 (2.69-4.00) 3.98 (3.25-4.89) 5.09 (4.09-6.60) 6.05 (4.72-7.90) 7.11 (5.34-9.47) 8.28 (5.96-11.3) 9.96 (6.89-13.9) 11.4 (7.59-15.9) 24-hr 2.49 (2.07-3.02) 2.86 (2.38-3.47) 3.58 (2.96-4.35) 4.28 (3.52-5.23) 5.40 (4.38-6.97) 6.39 (5.02-8.29) (5.67-9.91) 8.70 (6.32-11.8) 10.5 (7.31-14.5) 12.0 (8.06-16.6) 2-day 2.90 (2.43-3.49) 3.25 (2.72-3.91) 3.94 (3.28-4.76) 4.64 (3.84-5.61) 5.76 (4.70-7.37) 6.76 (5.35-8.70) 7.87 (6.02-10.4) 9.12 (6.68-12.3) 11.0 (7.72-15.1) 12.5 (8.50-17.2) 3-day 3.16 (2.66-3.79) 3.52 (2.96-4.22) 4.23 (3.54-5.08) 4.93 (4.10-5.95) 6.07 (4.97-7.73) 7.08 (5.63-9.07) 8.21 (6.30-10.7) 9.47 (6.97-12.7) 11.3 (8.00-15.5) 12.9 (8.79-17.7) 4-day 3.37 (2.84-4.02) 3.76 (3.16-4.49) 4.51 (3.78-5.40) 5.23 (4.36-6.29) 6.39 (5.24-8.08) 7.41 (5.90-9.44) 8.53 (6.56-11.1) 9.78 (7.22-13.0) 11.6 (8.23-15.8) 13.1 (9.00-18.0) 7-day 3.88 (3.28-4.60) 4.38 (3.70-5.20) 5.28 (4.45-6.28) 6.09 (5.11-7.28) 7.32 (5.99-9.11) 8.35 (6.66-10.5) 9.45 (7.28-12.2) 10.6 (7.87-14.0) 12.3 (8.77-16.7) 13.7 (9.46-18.6) 10-day 4.37 (3.71-5.16) 4.96 (4.20-5.86) 5.96 (5.04-7.06) 6.84 (5.75-8.14) 8.12 (6.64-10.0) 9.16 (7.31-11.4) 10.2 (7.90-13.1) 11.4 (8.44-14.9) 13.0 (9.26-17.4) 14.2 (9.88-19.3) 20-day 5.94 (5.08-6.97) 6.67 (5.70-7.83) 7.87 (6.70-9.25) 8.87 (7.50-10.5) 10.3 (8.40-12.4) 11.3 (9.08-13.9) 12.4 (9.63-15.6) 13.5 (10.1-17.5) 15.0 (10.8-19.9) 16.2 (11.3-21.7) 30-day 7.34 (6.30-8.56) 8.19 (7.02-9.57) 9.56 (8.17-11.2) 10.7 (9.08-12.6) 12.2 (10.0-14.7) 13.3 (10.7-16.3) 14.5 (11.2-18.1) 15.6 (11.6-20.0) 17.0 (12.3-22.4) 18.1 (12.7-24.3) 45-dav - 9.14 (7.87-10.6) 10.2 11.9 (8.78-11.9) (10.2-13.8) 13.2 (11.3-15.4) 14.9 (12.3-17.8) 16.2 (13.0-19.6) 17.4 (13.5-21.5) 18.5 (13.9-23.6) 19.9 (14.4-26.0) 20.9 (14.8-27.9) 60-day 10.7 (9.24-12.4) 12.0 14.0 (10.3-13.9) (12.0-16.2) I 15.5 (13.2-18.1) 17.4 (14.4-20.7) 18.8 (15.2-22.7) 1 20.1 (15.7-24.8) 21.3 (16.0-26.9) 22.7 (16.4-29.4) I 23.6 (16.7-31.3) 1 Precipitation frequency PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top PF graphical Page 409 of 1086 Appendix B Existing Conditions 10-Year Summary Page 410 of 1086 Kis) (2S ) Sub at 2S 1L Street private property Routing Diagram for Existing Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc, Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Page 411 of 1086 Existing Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10,20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area (sq-ft) CN Area Listing (all nodes) Description (subcatchment-numbers) 11,324 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (1S, 2S) 8,212 98 Paved parking, HSG B (1S, 2S) 3,046 98 Roofs, HSG B (1S, 2S) 22,582 79 TOTAL AREA Printed 9/20/2024 Page 2 Page 412 of 1086 0.98 cfs v / / / / / / 0 Existing Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 0 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Subcat 1S Runoff = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,319 cf, Depth= 2.26" Routed to Link 1L : Street Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 7,093 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 3,182 98 Paved parking, HSG B 2,061 98 Roofs, HSG B 12,336 77 Weighted Average 7,093 61 57.50% Pervious Area 5,243 98 42.50% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Subcat 1S Hydrograph [..y..F.;.(2.,-„..zij MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=12,336 sf Runoff Volume=2,319 cf Runoff Depth=2.26" Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Page 413 of 1086 / / / Existing Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=-4,26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Subcat 2S Runoff = 0.99 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,351 cf, Depth= 2.75" Routed to Link 2L : private property Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 4,231 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 5,030 98 Paved parking, HSG B 985 98 Roofs, HSG B 10,246 83 Weighted Average 4,231 61 41.29% Pervious Area 6,015 98 58.71% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Subcat 2S Hydrograph [q Runoff 0.99 cfs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=10,246 sf Runoff Volume=2,351 cf Runoff Depth=2.75" 0 Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 • 0 • 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 68 60 62 64 66 68 70 • i2 Time (hours) Page 414 of 1086 I CI AR rfs 0.98 cfs V 277 0 2 4 6 8 0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 41 46 48 50 52 54 5658 60 62 6466 68 70 72 Time (hours) 0 Inflow q Primary Inflow Area=12,336 sf Existing Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Link 1L: Street Inflow Area = 12,336 sf, 42.50% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.26" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,319 cf Primary = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,319 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 1L: Street Hydrograph Page 415 of 1086 Existing Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Link 2L: private property Inflow Area = 10,246 sf, 58,71% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.75" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.99 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,351 cf Primary = 0.99 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,351 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 2L: private property Hydrograph LL 0 QQ rfs 0.99 cfs Inflow Area=10,246 sf /7 ."..e" W I q Inflow q Primary 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 6'4 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Page 416 of 1086 Appendix C Proposed Conditions 10-Year Summary Page 417 of 1086 (3S (new Subcat) 2R) ... Subct 1S Subcat 2S 1L Street FrenIh,Drain private property Routing Diagram for Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc, Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Link Page 418 of 1086 Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 0 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (sq-ft) (subcatchment-numbers) 10,663 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (1S, 2S, 3S) 523 98 Paved parking, HSG A (3S) 8,349 98 Paved parking, HSG B (1S, 2S) 3,046 98 Roofs, HSG B (1S, 2S) 22,581 81 TOTAL AREA Printed 9/20/2024 Page 8 Page 419 of 1086 0 Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Subcat 1S Runoff = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,320 cf, Depth= 2.26" Routed to Link 1L : Street Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 7,088 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 3,187 98 Paved parking, HSG B 2,061 98 Roofs, HSG B 12,336 77 Weighted Average 7,088 61 57.46% Pervious Area 5,248 98 42.54% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Subcat 1S Hydrograph 11.:11r..zi-111 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=12,336 sf Runoff Volume=2,320 cf Runoff Depth=2.26" Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) 0.98 cfs 0 U- Page 420 of 1086 0.98 cfs Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 0 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 10 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Subcat 2S Runoff = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,341 cf, Depth= 2.90" Routed to Link 2L : private property Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 3,535 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 5,162 98 Paved parking, HSG B 985 98 Roofs, HSG B 9,682 84 Weighted Average 3,535 61 36.51% Pervious Area 6,147 98 63.49% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7,0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Subcat 2S Hydrograph 0 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=9,682 sf Runoff Volume=2,341 cf Runoff Depth=2.90" Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 o 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Page 421 of 1086 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=563 sf Runoff Volume=179 cf Runoff Depth=3.81" Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06- 0.055 0.05 0.045- 0 0.04- - 0.035 0.03- 0.025 0.02 0.015- 0.01 0.005- 0 Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 179 cf, Depth= 3.81" Routed to Pond 3P French Drain Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 523 98 Paved parking, HSG A 40 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 563 95 Weighted Average 40 61 7.10% Pervious Area 523 98 92.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Hydrograph q Runoff 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Page 422 of 1086 Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Pond 3P: French Drain Inflow Area = 563 sf, 92.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.81" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.07 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 179 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 13.19 hrs, Volume= 179 cf, Atten= 94%, Lag= 63.2 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 13.19 hrs, Volume= 179 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routed to Link 2L : private property Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 926.17' @ 13.19 hrs Surf.Area= 434 sf Storage= 112 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 790.0 min calculated for 179 cf (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 790.0 min ( 1,540.1 - 750.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 922.50' 76 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 189 cf Overall x 40.0% Voids #2 926.00' 1,028 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 1,103 cf Total Available Storage Elevation (feet) Surf.Area (sq-ft) Inc.Store (cubic-feet) Cum.Store (cubic-feet) 922.50 54 0 0 926.00 54 189 189 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 926.00 55 0 0 927.00 2,000 1,028 1,028 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 922.50' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #2 Primary 926.40' 1.0' long x 1.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 Coef. (English) 2.69 2.72 2.75 2.85 2,98 3.08 3.20 3.28 3.31 3.30 3.31 3.32 piscarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 13.19 hrs HW=926.17' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.00 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=922.50' (Free Discharge) L2=Broad•Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Page 423 of 1086 n naf f 0.00 cfs 0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045- 3 0.04 0 U. 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01- Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Pond 3P: French Drain Hydrograph I1 Inflow I Outflow I 1 Discarded ID Primary Inflow Area=563 sf Peak Elev=926.17' Storage=112 cf 0.00 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 1214 16 1820 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 4042 44 4648 50 52 54 56 5860 6264 66 6870 72 Time (hours) Page 424 of 1086 Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 3P: French Drain Elevation (feet) Surface (sq-ft) Storage (cubic-feet) Elevation (feet) Surface (sq-ft) Storage (cubic-feet) 922.50 54 0 925.15 54 57 922.55 54 1 925.20 54 58 922.60 54 2 925.25 54 59 922.65 54 3 925.30 54 60 922.70 54 4 925.35 54 62 922.75 54 5 925.40 54 63 922.80 54 6 925.45 54 64 922.85 54 8 925.50 54 65 922.90 54 9 925.55 54 66 922.95 54 10 925.60 54 67 923.00 54 11 925.65 54 68 923.05 54 12 925.70 54 69 923.10 54 13 925.75 54 70 923.15 54 14 925.80 54 71 923.20 54 15 925.85 54 72 923.25 54 16 925.90 54 73 923.30 54 17 925.95 54 75 923.35 54 18 926.00 109 76 923.40 54 19 926.05 206 81 923.45 54 21 926.10 304 91 923.50 54 22 926.15 401 106 923.55 54 23 926.20 498 126 923.60 54 24 926.25 595 150 923.65 54 25 926.30 692 180 923.70 54 26 926.35 790 214 923.75 54 27 926.40 887 253 923.80 54 28 926.45 984 297 923.85 54 29 926.50 1,082 346 923.90 54 30 926.55 1,179 400 923.95 54 31 926.60 1,276 459 924.00 54 32 926.65 1,373 522 924.05 54 33 926.70 1,471 591 924.10 54 35 926.75 1,568 664 924.15 54 36 926.80 1,665 742 924.20 54 37 926.85 1,762 825 924.25 54 38 926.90 1,859 913 924.30 54 39 926.95 1,957 1,006 924.35 54 40 927.00 2,054 1,103 924.40 54 41 924.45 54 42 924.50 54 43 924.55 54 44 924.60 54 45 924.65 54 46 924.70 54 48 924.75 54 49 924.80 54 50 924.85 54 51 924.90 54 52 924.95 54 53 925.00 54 54 925.05 54 55 925.10 54 56 Page 425 of 1086 a 0 3 o u. 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 15 Summary for Link 'IL: Street Inflow Area = 12,336 sf, 42.54% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.26" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,320 cf Primary = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,320 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 1L: Street Hydrograph I fl cIR rf 0.98 cfs 1 Inflow Area=12,336 sf o Inflow 1 0 Primary Page 426 of 1086 Link 2L: private property Hydrograph LL 0." 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Inflow Area 10,245 sf {0 Inflow 0 Primary rf 0.98 cfs Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Link 2L: private property Inflow Area = 10,245 sf, 65.10% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.74" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,341 cf Primary = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,341 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Page 427 of 1086 Appendix D Soil Summary Page 428 of 1086 44° 52'40" N 44° 52' 35" N 8 8 Soil Map—Hennepin County, Minnesota 470920 4710:0 470E60 4709130 8 471040 471030 44° SY 40" N 44° 52' 35" N S Map Scale: 1:778 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet Meters 40 60 A 0 35 70 140 210 Feet Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: DIM Zone 15N WGS84 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Nom Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/19/2024 Page 1 of 3 N 0 10 20 Page 429 of 1086 Map Unit Description: Urban land-Lester complex, 2 to 18 percent slopes---Hennepin County, Minnesota Hennepin County, Minnesota L52C—Urban land-Lester complex, 2 to 18 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: gj3r Elevation: 800 to 1,020 feet Mean annual precipitation: 23 to 35 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 124 to 200 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Urban land: 75 percent Lester and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Setting Landform: Moraines Parent material: Loamy till Description of Lester Setting Landform: Hills on moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: loam Bt - 7 to 38 inches: clay loam Bk - 38 to 60 inches: loam C - 60 to 80 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 6 to 18 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 25 percent Gypsum, maximum content: 1 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.5 inches) USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/19/2024 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2 Page 430 of 1086 Map Unit Description: Urban land-Lester complex, 2 to 18 percent slopes---Hennepin County, Minnesota Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R103XY020MN - Loamy Upland Savannas Forage suitability group: Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Other vegetative classification: Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Kingsley Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills on moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R103XY020MN - Loamy Upland Savannas Other vegetative classification: Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Hydric soil rating: No Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Hennepin County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 10, 2023 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/19/2024 ATM Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2 Page 431 of 1086 Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover ExiSting Alley 2087 SF Existing Alley 2007 SF Existing Deck = 126 SF Existing Deck 128 SF Ekistnp Orme = 2710 SF Existing Drive = 2710 SF Exiting House 2735 SF Existing House = 2735 SF Existing Pato 1591 SF Existing Pato 1591 SF Existing Pool • 800 SF ExhillngPool = 800 SF Eviseng Stoop = 233 SF &Meng Stoop = 233 SF Existing Walk 204 SF Existing Walk = 204 SF Total Hardcover = 10486 SF Proposed Boulders 85 SF Total Lot Ares - 22579 SF Proposed Palm • 570 SF Percent Hardcover = 46.44 % Proposed Steppe. 24 SF Proposed Steps • 42 SF Total Hardcover = 11207 SF Total LotArea • 22579 SF Percent Hardcover = 49.63 % Bluoaloria Full Color Thermal 264 so COP To Match Pool Sack 50th Charcoal Soldier Cowl., 316 so It HardScape Legend Plant List Report Common Name Slze rats/ TREES ./- Pink Spire Crabapple 2 EVERGREENS IPDwarf Globe Blue Spruce 1 SHRUBS ODouble Play Doozle Splrea 1 ttar Glow Girl Spireo 5 PERENNIALS Karl Foerster Feather Reed Grass 5 *Shenandoah Switch Grass 7 - !Summer Beauty Allium 19 GROUND COVERS *Red Creeping Thyme 29 VINES OTHERS EXISTING OExIsting Tree 1 Proposed Landscape Area Legend Drve 575 04 On Leicdscape Propose., WAIL UTILITIES KEY Symbol Fixture QTY 0 Downspout 4 L Catch Basin (Existing) 3 6 H2O Spigot 2 El Sump 1 ri Electrical Outlet 1 S. F„ P4 er W t \ , Pornictie Fire F. Ex. neat,. Sih Fence Along "thosting Fence • Eto,icers Co. Pool Deck Edethiricol Outlet By Oiler 6 4 French Dron See Denvec Eng.neering For Specs SOn Logs .Along SJI I Remove fence section while working end out rt bock togictriler cir end of project 1/8' =T-a. 15 SCALE. 1/e•=1.-0 Scale: Desciler AS Koller Dimon associate. Design Assoc Rebsaa0 8 Dale litasse. Tr arm corium proem., relaneollon*laelmap ',mama.; Clespn IK am uraaoni.d duplcom. tdnak Peleaaea 3 of 8 Poo Dele:20241,03 Fib riemem.3324a148 Jamo.v.ve Measure Input- SH Measure Team C8 SH Silt Lags 'Along ,°dev - X Scott Joing 2383 Pilot Knob Rd Design Plan Mendota Heights, MN 55120 5605 McGuire Rd Edina MN 55439 , Phone 651-203-3000 Far 651-455-1734 SOUTHVIEW SoutriviewDesign.corn •$.13ESIGN4, oand.cop. NO Date Pension Notes NO. Dale Issue Notes Page 432 of 1086 ir=.111111= 111' 4izt,„0„, UTILITIES KEY Symbol Fixture QTY 0 Downspout 4 Gatch Basin (Existing) 3 6 H2O Spigot 2 U Sump 1 r..1 Electrical Outlet 1 Existing Hardcover Existing Alley = 2087 SF Existing Deck = 126 SF Existing Drive = 2710 SF Existing House = 2735 SF Existing Patio = 1591 SF Existing Pool = 800 SF Existing Stoop = 233 SF Existing Walk = 204 SF Total Hardcover = 10486 SF Total Lot Area = 22579 SF Percent Hardcover = 46.44 % Proposed Hardcover Existing Alley = 2087 SF Existing Deck = 126 SF Existing Drive = 2710 SF Existing House = 2735 SF Existing Patio = 1591 SF Existing Pool = 800 SF Existing Stoop = 233 SF Existing Walk = 204 SF Proposed Boulders = 85 SF Proposed Patio = 570 SF Proposed Steppers = 24 SF Proposed Steps = 42 SF Total Hardcover = 11207 SF Total Lot Area = 22579 SF Percent Hardcover = 49.63 % - - %Immo • r. Vp At. 41111... .11111.. 1" 20 0 = -0" 20 SCALE 40 This drawing contains proprietary information which belongs to Southview Design Inc. Any unauthorized duplication or use is strictly prohibited. Designer. Measure Input: Josh Koller SH Design Associate: Measure Team: Nick Heiling CB SH Sheet 5 of 5 Released By: Date Released: / / Scott Joing 2383 Pilot Knob Rd Grading Plan 11x17 Mendota Heights, MN 55120 NO Date Revision Notes Phone: 651-203-3000 Fax: 651-455-1734 SOUTH VIEW 5605 McGuire Rd SouthviewDesign.com -'DESIGN- Edina , MN 55439 LP„Ci3C01)( NO Date Issue Notes Scale: " = 20'-0" Print Date: 2024-10-09 File Name: 2024-04-15 Joing.vwx Page 433 of 1086 //-/I-ii -- w C 2 0 0 0 x 900.0 X 900 0TC X 900 OTW • 0 LOTAREA CALCULATION: Lot Area = 22,581 SF EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE: House w/ Cantilever =Z754 SF Covered Porch = 291 SF Deck 116 SF (Less 150 SF). 0 SF Shed = 100 SF Total = 3,145 SF Existing Building Coverage = 13.9% EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: House w/ Cantilever = 2,754 SF Covered Porch = 291 SF Driveway, Front Walk = 2,984 SF Deck w/ Steps = 127 SF Shed = 100 SF Patio = 1,578 SF Pool = 820 SF Pool Equipment Pad = 30 SF Driveway Servicing Neighboring Homes =2,574 SF Total = 11,258 SF Existing Impervious Surface = 49.9% Fence Water Main Boulder Retaining Wall Keystone Retaining Wal Air Conditioning Unit Gas Meter Light Pole Power Pole Water Shutoff Valve Existing Elevation Top of Curb Elevation Top of Wall Elevation Existing Contour Found Iron Monument Set Iron Monument Inscribed R.L.S 15230 20 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND 'Driveway to adjoining homes located in rear yard Is not utilized by homeowner al subject properly. NOTE: 25% Maximum Allowable Building Coverage 50% Maximum Allowable Impervious Surface GENERAL NOTES: • Exiating building dimensions are measured to siding and not building foundation. • No title commitment was provided and no research was performed for any easement. not shown on this survey. • Location of utilities hown are from observed vidence In the field and/or plans furnished by others and are considered aggro imate. Gopher State One Call or a private utility locator should be contacted to locate dillies on site before excavation. N00°21 '43"W 175.02 M Its A r---5;UTPXY EL.E1a7-- 7- , 15 I rs'T-L. k../ I MCGUIRE ROAD N89°31'54"E 33.40 MEAS. (33.4 MAP stz164.05 A.13°33'47' ' (L.36.6 no 46.47 MEAS. X S27 7 P27 OLT /// XP7, <5\ moor 10/ ej L . I SNARED ASPAHLT DRIVEWAY S89°40'05"W 185.00 MEAS. (185.0 PLAT) X.P2PC TREE INVENTORY TREE NO. SPECIES D.B.H. HEIGHT CLASSIFICATION C.R.Z. TREE PLAN NOTES #100 SPRUCE 15' OVER 30' HERITAGE 22.5' N/A #101 SILVER MAPLE 24* NOT PROTECTED 36' N/A #102 COTTONWOOD 48' HERITAGE 72' N/A #103 SILVER MAPLE 36' NOT PROTECTED 54' N/A #104 SILVER MAPLE 24" NOT PROTECTED 36' N/A #105 ELM 24' PROTECTED 36' N/A #106 ELM 15' PROTECTED 22.5' N/A #107 ELM 20' PROTECTED 30' N/A #108 ELM 20' PROTECTED 30' N/A #109 ELM 24' PROTECTED 36' N/A #110 SILVER MAPLE 30' NOT PROTECTED 45' N/A #111 APPLE 18' NOT PROTECTED 27' N/A D.B.H. = DI meter at Breast H ight C.R.Z. = Critical Root Zone EXISTING CONDITION SURVEY FOR: SOUTHVIEW DESIGN :V'', DATED: 06-28-2024 WOODROW A. BROWN, R.L.S. MN REG 15230 W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. 8030 OLD CEDAR AVENUE SO., SURE 228 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 PH: (952) 854-4055 WBROVVNLANDSURVEYING.COM EMAIL: INFOOWBROWNLANDSURVEYING.COM JOB NO. 239-24 BOOK/PAGE SCALE 1" = 10' DRAWN CME REFERENCE SITE ADDRESS 5605 McGuire Rd. Edina, MN 55439 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lot 7, Block 6, LA BUENA VISTA, Hennepin County, Minnesota. REVISIONS REMARKS Revise impervious surface to include driveway servicing neighboring homes. I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. DATE 07-15-2024 SHEET 1 of 1 18x24 BENCHMARKS ID No. 1164: T.N.H. al the northeast corner of McGuire Rd. and Tracy Ave. Elevation = 921.46 (NGVD 29). ID NO. 963: T.N.H. at the northeast comer of Brook Dr and Tracy Ave. Elevation = 925.48 (NOVD 29). Page 434 of 1086 20 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND 1[5501 I LV I 31.7 315 7 1 /Cg=„,„, 15 I E-N L.V I I CIA T LV I MCGUIRE ROAD 4 05 A.13°33.47' 1205 ix) N89°31'54'E 0_06.6 P 33.40 MEAS. (33.4PL41) =36.47 MEAS. 9 , 1 x.253 8104 R i t SHARED ASPAHLT DRIVEWAY X.221 S89°40.05-W 185.00 MEAS. (185.0 PLAT) Revise impervious surface to include driveway servicing neighboring homes. SITE PLAN I PROPOSED PATIO/LANDSCAPING FOR: SOUTHVIEW DESIGN TREE INVENTORY TREE NO. SPECIES D.B.H. HEIGHT CLASSIFICATION C.R.Z. TREE PLAN NOTES #100 SPRUCE 15" OVER 30' HERITAGE 22.5' N/A #101 SILVER MAPLE 24- NOT PROTECTED 36' N/A #102 COTTONWOOD 48' HERITAGE 72' NIA #103 SILVER MAPLE 36' NOT PROTECTED 54' NIA #104 SILVER MAPLE 24' NOT PROTECTED 36' NIA #105 ELM 24' PROTECTED 36' PROTECT #106 ELM 15" PROTECTED 22.5 PROTECT #107 ELM 20' PROTECTED 30' PROTECT #108 ELM 20' PROTECTED 30' PROTECT #109 ELM 24' PROTECTED 36' PROTECT #110 SILVER MAPLE 30' NOT PROTECTED 45' N/A #111 APPLE 18' NOT PROTECTED 27' NIA D.B.H. = DI meter at Breast H Ight C.R.Z. = Critical Root Zone //— w 0 0 X 900.0 X 900 OTC X 903 OTW 900 - • 0 0 0 0 X1900.0) LOT AREA CALCULATION: Lot Area = 22,581 SF EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE: House w/ Cantilever = 2,754 SF Covered Porch = 291 SF Deck 116 SF (Less 150 SF) = 0 SF Shed = 100 SF Total = 3,145 SF Existing Building Coverage = 13.9% NOTE: 25% Maximum Allowable Building Coverage 50% Maximum Allowable Impervious Surface Fence Water Main Boulder Retaining Wall Keystone Retaining Wall Air Conditioning Unit Gas Meter Light Pole Power Pole Water Shutoff Valve Existing Elevation Top of Curb Elevation Top of Wall Elevation Existing Contour Found Iron Monument Set Iron Monument Inscribed R.L.S 15230 Proposed Silt Fence/Erosion Control Proposed Retaining Wall Proposed Elevation Proposed Contour EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: House w/ Cantilever = 2,754 SF Covered Porch = 291 SF Driveway, Front Walk = 2,984 SF Deck w/ Steps =127 SF Shed = 100 SF Patio = 1,578 SF Pool= 820 SF Pool Equipment Pad = 30 SF Driveway Servicing Neighboring Homes = 2,574 SF Total = 11,258 SF Existing Impervious Surface = 49.9% 'Driveway to adjoining homes located In rear yard Is not utilized by homeowner at subject property. PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ADDITIONS: Paver Walk = 130 SF Paver Patio & Steps = 506 SF Stepping Stones = 24 SF Net Impervious Surface Increase = 660 SF Total Proposed Impervious Surface = 11,918 SF or 52.8% GENERAL NOTES: • Existing building dimensions are measured to siding and not building foundation. • No title commitment was provided and no research was performed for any easements not shown on this survey. • Location of utilities hown are from observed vidence In the field and/or plans furnished by others and are considered apple. hnate. Gopher State One Cal or a private utility locator should be contacted to locale Oldies on site before excavation. 07-15-2024 DATE REVISIONS REMARKS JOB NO. 239-24 BOOK/PAGE SHEET 1 of 1 18x24 SITE ADDRESS 5605 McGuire Rd Edina, MN 55439 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lol 7, Block 6, LA BUENA VISTA, Hennepin County. Minnesota. BENCHMARKS ID No. II 64: T.N.H. al the northeast comer of McGuire Rd and Tracy Ave. Elevation = 921.46 (NOVD 29). ID No. 963: T.N.H. at the northeast comer of Brook Dr. cud Tracy Ave. Elevation = 925.48 (NOVD 29). I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. DATED: 07-09-2024 WOODROW A. BROWN, R.L.S. MN REG 15230 SCALE 1"= 10' DRAWN CME REFERENCE W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC 8030 OLD CEDAR AVENUE SO., SURE 228 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 PH: (952) 854.4055 WBROWNLANDSURVEYING.COM EMAIL: INFOOWBROWNLANDSURVEYING.COM Page 435 of 1086 INLET SPECIFICATIONS AS PER THE PLAN DIMENSION LENGTH AND FLOW VVIDTH TO MATCH FLAP POCKET MINIMUM DOUBLE STITCHED SEAMS ALL AROUND SIDE PIECES AND ON FLAP POCKETS 2111 D2 zm 2 2 FRONT, BACK, AND BOTTOM TO BE MADE FROM SINGLE o. PIECE OF FABRIC TIRE COMPACTION ZONE FLOW EXISTING GROUND -- MACHINE SLICE 8 IN -12 IN DEPTH OVERFLOW HOLES (2 IN X 4 IN HOLE SHALL BE HEAT CUT INTO ALL FOUR SIDE PANELS) GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, -- 36 IN WIDE 5 FT MINIMUM LENGTH POST AT 6 FT MAXIMUM SPACING PLASTIC ZIP TIES (50 LBS TENSILE) LOCATED IN TOP BIN USE REBAR OR STEEL ROD -- FOR REMOVAL (FOR INLETS WITH CAST CURB BOX REPLACE ROD WITH WOOD 2 IN X 4 IN). EXTEND 10 IN BEYOND GRATE WIDTH ON BOTH SIDES, LENGTH VARIES. SECURE TO GRATE VATH WIRE OR PLASTIC TIES. SILT FENCE MACHINE SLICED) NOT TO SCALE INLET PROTECTION NOT TO SCALE LANDSCAPE -I- GRATE/INSPECTION PORT RIM=926.4 6" PERFORATED D a°1 ‘•ll",( 4i \ 144V:I'M 4 _ AtIWP "11441 FRENCH DRAIN --.6 FINAL GRADE 2 MCGUIRE ROAD GENERAL GRADING NOTES: 1. THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CITY OF EDINA SHALL APPLY EXCEPT WHERE MODIFIED BY THESE DOCUMENTS. 2. "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (1-800-252-1166) SHALL BE NOTIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. 3. PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION, THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WITH UTILITY COMPANIES. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY WITH ANY CONFLICTS. 4. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE ON THE SITE AT ALL TIMES. 5. EXISTING TOPSOIL SHALL BE SALVAGED TO PROVIDE 4" TOPSOIL COVERAGE OVER ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE REVEGETATED. 6. THE BUILDING PAD MUST BE PROVIDED WITH POSITIVE DRAINAGE. THIS WORK SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT. 7. AFTER THE SILT FENCE HAS BEEN REMOVED REMAINING SEDIMENT SHALL BE SMOOTHED TO CONFORM WITH THE EXISTING GRADE, PREPARED AND SEEDED OR SODDED AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 8. NO FINISHED SLOPE SHALL EXCEED 4H : 1V UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 9. PERMITEE MUST MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. METHODS OF MINIMIZING SOIL COMPACTION INCLUDE THE USE OF TRACKED EQUIPMENT. EROSION CONTROL NOTES: 1. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (I.E. SILT FENCE, BIO-ROLLS, ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT, INLET PROTECTION, ETC.) SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. 2. INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED AT ANY INLET THAT MAY RECEIVE RUNOFF FROM THE DISTURBED AREAS OF THE PROJECT. INLET PROTECTION MAY BE REMOVED FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (FLOODING / FREEZING) HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED. THE PERMITTED MUST RECEIVE WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE CITY ENGINEER VERIFYING THE NEED FOR REMOVAL. 3. INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S, SUCH AS SILT FENCE, AROUND ALL STOCKPILES. 4. RETAIN AND PROTECT AS MUCH NATURAL VEGETATION AS FEASIBLE. WHEN VEGETATION IS REMOVED DURING DEVELOPMENT, THE EXPOSED CONDITION OF LAND SHALL BE KEPT TO THE SHORTEST PRACTICAL PERIOD OF TIME, BUT NOT LONGER THAN 60 DAYS. ANY EXPOSED AREAS EXCEEDING THIS TIME-FRAME SHALL BE TEMPORARILY STABILIZED (STRAW MULCH, WOODCHIPS, ROCK). AREAS BEING USED FOR MATERIAL STORAGE AND AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION ARE EXEMPT FROM TEMPORARY STABILIZATION. 5. ANY STEEP SLOPES (3H : 1V OR STEEPER) EXPOSED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH TEMPORARY VEGETATION, MULCHING OR BY OTHER MEANS ACCEPTABLE TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WITHIN 14 DAYS OF CEASING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES ON THE STEEP SLOPES. STOCKPILES MAY BE PROTECTED BY AN ANCHORED TARP OR PLASTIC SHEET. 6. PROVIDE DUST CONTROL AS NECESSARY. DUST CONTROL CAN INCLUDE WATER. 7. REMOVE ALL SOILS AND SEDIMENTS TRACKED OR OTHERWISE DEPOSITED ONTO PUBLIC PAVEMENT AREAS ON A DAILY BASIS OR AS NEEDED. 8. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S SHALL BE INSPECTED EVERY 7 DAYS, OR WITHIN 24 HOURS OF ALL RAIN EVENTS GREATER THAN 1.0" IN 24 HOURS. CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED SHALL BE INITIATED WITHIN 24 HOURS. 9. SILT FENCE, BIO-ROLLS AND INLET PROTECTION DEVICES MUST BE REPAIRED, REPLACED OR SUPPLEMENTED WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/3 THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE. THESE REPAIRS MUST BE MADE WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW. 10. AFTER FINAL GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED, EXPOSED SOILS MUST BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. PERMANENT STABILIZATION SHALL CONSIST OF 4 INCHES TOPSOIL, AND SEED, MULCH AND FERTILIZER APPLIED BY METHODS AND RATES RECOMMENDED IN MN/DOT SPECIFICATION 2575 AND MN/DOT SEEDING MANUAL, OR SOD. THE SEED MIX SHALL BE MN/DOT 25-151. 11.NO CONCRETE WASHOUT ALLOWED ON SITE, TRUCK BASED SELF CONTAINMENT WASHOUT DEVICES REQUIRED. 12. OIL STAINS ON CITY STREETS SHALL BE CLEANED UP WITH FLOOR DRY, AND DISPOSED OF AS A HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIAL. 13. ALL HAZARDOUS WASTE SHALL BE STORED CLEANED UP AND DISPOSED OF PER EPA STANDARDS. 14. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL ALL DISTURBED AREAS HAVE BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. 15. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE AFTER PERMANENT STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. 16.TEMPORARY PUMPED DISCHARGE POLLUTION PREVENTION TECHNIQUES: "DANDY DEWATERING BAG" BROCK WHITE CO. USA. 17. CONTACT PERSON FOR SITE CLEANLINESS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS: WILLIE DORNIDEN (651) 203-3034. PUBLIC ROAD s, N88'3134•E 33.40 MEAS. (33.4 PLAT) R_1 ( 5 A=13'33%7' (L.;306.6 PLAT) .435.41 MEAS' 1 IN X 2 IN X 24 IN LONG WOODEN STAKES. STAKES SHALL BE DRIVEN THROUGH THE BACK HALF OF THE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG AT AN ANGLE OF 45 DEGREES WITH THE TOP OF THE STAKE POINTING UPSTREAM. STRAW SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG 20' MINIMUM LENGTH o o SURFACE FLOW RADIUS AS REQUIRED -- CRUSHED ROCK PER SPECIFICATION USE EXISTING DRIVE AS CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1111 \ 01 CAD \ 01 Source \ 01 Survey Base.dwg FRENCH DRAIN (2'x27'X3.5') PER 5/C1 IT SILT FENCE OR - BIO-ROLLS S89.40.05'W 185.00 MEAS. (185.0 PLAT) 922.5(LEVEL BOTTOM) BACKFILL AND COMPACT SOIL FROM TRENCH ON UPGRADIENT SIDE OF SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG EXISTING GROUND PLACE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG IN SHALLOW TRENCH (1 IN - 2 IN DEPTH) CC) MIN. 4" TOPSOIL NATIVE FILL DEPTH VARIES MIN. 4" PEA GRAVEL CLEAN AGGREGATE (1 1/2"± RIVER ROCK), PEA GRAVEL, OR SAND, (<5% FINES) ADS GEOSYNTHETIC NONWOVEN GEOTEXTILE OR APPROVED EQUAL. MIN. 4" OF R" PEA GRAVEL 8 IN -10 IN EMBEDMENT DEPTH SPACE BETWEEN STAKES SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF 1 FT FOR DITCH CHECKS OR 2 FT FOR OTHER APPLICATIONS. BIOROLLS EXIT WIDTH AS REQUIRED 1 IN - 2 IN CRUSHED ROCK D EXISTING GROUND ROCK STABILIZING EXIT (IF NECESSARY) NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE - TAPER EDGES AT 1:1 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AZI1 FRENCH DRAIN gar NOT TO SCALE 20 40 SCALE IN FEET F:\surveyVa buena vista DRAWN BY: ABL CHECKED BY: GRP DESIGNED BY: JAP REVISIONS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIO • ENGINEER ,UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. EFFREY A. PRASCH, P.E. DATE: 09.20.24 LIC. NO.: 52706 SOUTHVIEW DESIGN 2383 PILOT KNOB ROAD ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55120 LOT7, BLOCK 6 LA BUENA VISTA 5605 MCGUIRE ROAD EDINA, MN DEMARC LAND SURVEYING & ENGINEERING 7601 73rd Avenue North (763) 560-3093 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 DemarcInc.com PROJECT: 90824 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN SHEET NO. Cl OF Cl Page 436 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 8.2 Prepared By: Chad Millner, Engineering Director Item Type: Public Hearing Department: Engineering Item Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 2024-117: Vacating Right-of-Way Easement at 5805 Mait Lane Action Requested: Approve Resolution No. 2024-117 vacating right-of-way easement at 5805 Mait Lane. Information/Background: The recent sale of the property discovered an easement vacation process that was not completed in the early 2000's. The paperwork was submitted along with new easements, but the process was never completed by Council and thus not recorded with the County. The property has sold, and the new owner is looking to clear up the easements. Resources/Financial Impacts: No impact to City operations or finances. Relationship to City Policies: N/A. Supporting Documentation: 1. Resolution No. 2024-117 2. Certificate of Mailing 3. 5805 Mait Lane - Easement Application 4. Easement Vacation and Legal Description 5. New Easement Creation and Legal Description Page 437 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-117 VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT 5805 MAIT LANE WHEREAS, an application was received on November 11, 2024, from Natasha Alexander Snyder and Neil Snyder, requesting that the 5805 Mait Lane public utility easements be vacated; and WHEREAS, two weeks published and posted notice was given and the hearing was held on December 17, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public utility easement is not needed for public purposes; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota: 1. That the following described public utility is hereby vacated: Vacate that part of the Utility Easement over, under and across Lots 59 and 59A, "ROLLING GREEN SECTION TWO", Hennepin County, Minnesota as dedicated in the plat of "GUNNAR JOHNSON'S REARRANGEMENT, ROLLING GREEN", Hennepin County, Minnesota lying easterly of the west 15.00 feet of said Lots 59 and 59A thereof. 2. The vacation shall not affect the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning or controlling the electric or telephone poles and lines, gas and sewer lines, water pipes, mains and hydrants thereon or thereunder, if any, to continue maintaining the same or to enter upon such way or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto. 3. That the Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute all documents necessary, in the opinion of the City Attorney, to affect the transfer of this property. Adopted this 17th day of December, 2024. Page 438 of 1086 Attest: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this _____ day of __________, 2024. _______________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 439 of 1086 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates December 5, 2024, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Vacation of Public Right of Way Easement, 5805 Mait Lane (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 12 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 5 day of November, 2024. ________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 440 of 1086 Notice of Public Hearing Vacation of 5805 Mait Lane 1 December 5, 2024 English: This and other public hearing notices can be viewed online at EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Español: Este y otros avisos de audiencia pública se pueden ver en línea en EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Soomaali: Tan iyo ogeysiisyo kale oo dhagaysi dadweyne ayaa lagu daawan karaa onlayn ahaan EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Further Information: City of Edina Engineering 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 952-826-0371 Vacation of Public Right-of-Way Easement at 5805 Mait Lane Legal Description of Easement Vacation: Vacate that part of the Utility Easement over, under and across Lots 59 and 59A, "ROLLING GREEN SECTION TWO", Hennepin County, Minnesota as dedicated in the plat of "GUNNAR JOHNSON'S REARRANGEMENT, ROLLING GREEN", Hennepin County, Minnesota lying easterly of the west 15.00 feet of said Lots 59 and 59A thereof. Request: An application was received on November 11, 2024 requesting that easements be vacated at 5805 Mait Lane. See attached map. Provide Public Input Share your thoughts! Public input can be provided in a variety of methods to City Council. All comments are reviewed and considered; therefore, you do not need to participate in more than one method. Public Input Options: 1 – Provide public input online at https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/public-hearings. (Available now) 2 – Leave a voicemail with your public input at 952-826-0377. Staff will submit the transcribed voicemail to Better Together Edina. (Available now) 3 – A public hearing will take place in the City Hall Council Chambers, 4801 W. 50th St., 7 p.m. Tuesday, December 17, 2024. Attend the meeting in person or watch the meeting live from home on cable channels 813 or 16 or stream live on YouTube.com/EdinaTV, or EdinaMN.gov/Meetings. Call in to provide live testimony at 312-535-8110 the night of the meeting and enter access code 2631 609 4429, password is 5454. City Council will make a decision at its meeting 7 p.m. Tuesday, Dec. 17. Page 441 of 1086 Notice of Public Hearing Vacation of 5805 Mait Lane 2 Page 442 of 1086 Owner Address City State Zip Robert Sheehy & Andrea Kmetz-Sheehy 5805 Mait Lane Edina, MN 55436 Octavio Portu Jr & Jody Portu 4705 Annaway Dr Edina, MN 55437 David & Patricia Murphy 4701 Annaway Dr Edina, MN 55438 William Scott Jr & Tiffany Stuart 4700 Merilane Edina, MN 55439 Page 443 of 1086 Page 444 of 1086 Page 445 of 1086 Page 446 of 1086 Page 447 of 1086 Page 448 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 8.3 Prepared By: Chad Millner, Engineering Director Item Type: Public Hearing Department: Engineering Item Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 2024-116: Vacating Right-of-Way Easement at 7250 France Avenue Action Requested: Approve Resolution No. 2024-116 vacating right-of-way easement at 7250 France Avenue. Information/Background: A 10-ft drainage and utility easement is currently located along the north property line of 7250 France Avenue. Construction of the approved project is anticipated soon. This easement needs to be vacated to allow construction to occur without encroachments. Resources/Financial Impacts: No impacts to City operations and finances. Relationship to City Policies: N/A Supporting Documentation: 1. Resolution No. 2024-116 2. Certificate of Mailing 3. 7250 France Ave - Easement Application 4. Easement Vacation and Legal Description Page 449 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-116 VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT 7250 FRANCE AVENUE WHEREAS, an application was received on November 13, 2024, from 7250 France Group, LLC, requesting that the 7250 France Avenue public utility easements be vacated; and WHEREAS, two weeks published and posted notice was given and the hearing was held on December 17, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public utility easement is not needed for public purposes; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota: 1. That the following described public utility is hereby vacated: That part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated in Lot 44, Block 1, OSCAR ROBERTS FIRST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies within the northerly 10.00 feet of said Lot 44. 2. The vacation shall not affect the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning or controlling the electric or telephone poles and lines, gas and sewer lines, water pipes, mains and hydrants thereon or thereunder, if any, to continue maintaining the same or to enter upon such way or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto. 3. That the Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute all documents necessary, in the opinion of the City Attorney, to affect the transfer of this property. Adopted this 17th day of December, 2024. Page 450 of 1086 Attest: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this _____ day of __________, 2024. _______________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 451 of 1086 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates December 5, 2024, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Vacation of Public Right of Way Easement, 7250 France Avenue (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 12 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 5 day of November, 2024. ________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 452 of 1086 Notice of Public Hearing Vacation of 7250 France Ave 1 December 5, 2024 English: This and other public hearing notices can be viewed online at EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Español: Este y otros avisos de audiencia pública se pueden ver en línea en EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Soomaali: Tan iyo ogeysiisyo kale oo dhagaysi dadweyne ayaa lagu daawan karaa onlayn ahaan EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Further Information: City of Edina Engineering 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 952-826-0371 Vacation of Public Right-of-Way Easement at 7250 France Avenue Legal Description of Easement Vacation: That part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated in Lot 44, Block 1, OSCAR ROBERTS FIRST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies within the northerly 10.00 feet of said Lot 44. Request: An application was received on November 13, 2024 requesting that easements be vacated at 7250 France Avenue. See attached map. Provide Public Input Share your thoughts! Public input can be provided in a variety of methods to City Council. All comments are reviewed and considered; therefore, you do not need to participate in more than one method. Public Input Options: 1 – Provide public input online at https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/public-hearings. (Available now) 2 – Leave a voicemail with your public input at 952-826-0377. Staff will submit the transcribed voicemail to Better Together Edina. (Available now) 3 – A public hearing will take place in the City Hall Council Chambers, 4801 W. 50th St., 7 p.m. Tuesday, December 17, 2024. Attend the meeting in person or watch the meeting live from home on cable channels 813 or 16 or stream live on YouTube.com/EdinaTV, or EdinaMN.gov/Meetings. Call in to provide live testimony at 312-535-8110 the night of the meeting and enter access code 2631 609 4429, password is 5454. City Council will make a decision at its meeting 7 p.m. Tuesday, Dec. 17. Page 453 of 1086 Notice of Public Hearing Vacation of 7250 France Ave 2 Page 454 of 1086 Pid Tax name Tax add l1 Tax add l2 Tax add l3 Current res Address Sub id1 Ctu name State code Zip RICHARD F 7120 LYNM EDINA MN 55435 7120 LYNMAR LN EDINA MN 55435 RYAN THOM 7125 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7125 BRISTOL BLVD EDINA MN 55435 SAMUEL A S 7121 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7121 BRISTOL BLVD EDINA MN 55435 STEPHEN G 7204 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7204 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 BRYNJA C K7124 LYNM EDINA MN 55435 7124 LYNMAR LN EDINA MN 55435 VENTAS RE PO BOX 808COCKEYSVILLE MD 21030 7128 FRANCE AVE EDINA MN 55435 CEDAR OF 7340 GALLA EDINA MN 55435 7300 GALLAGHER DR EDINA MN 55435 MARJORIE T7203 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7203 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 PAUL B HUG7208 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7208 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 LIINA ROTH7210 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7210 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 ASAD DAHI 7212 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7212 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 FRANCIS A 7209 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7209 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 LISA K POH 7206 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7206 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 BRUCE & C 7201 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7201 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 WILLIAM R 7128 LYNM EDINA MN 55435 7128 LYNMAR LN EDINA MN 55435 J A ZAHORS 7129 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7129 BRISTOL BLVD EDINA MN 55435 FRANCE PR 708 5TH ST MINNEAPOLIS MN 55414 7200 FRANCE AVE EDINA MN 55435 ANJELIKA A 7200 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7200 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 STEPHEN H 7205 BRIST EDINA MN 55435 7205 BRISTOL CIR EDINA MN 55435 Page 455 of 1086 X Page 456 of 1086 MINNESOTA CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 21st day of September, 2018 ______________________________________________ Rory L. Synstelien Minnesota License No. 44565 Project No. 18246 SHEET 1 OF 1 16080 SCALE IN FEET 0 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com DESCRIPTION That part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated in Lot 44, Block 1, OSCAR ROBERTS FIRST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. which lies within the northerly 10.00 feet of said Lot 44. Page 457 of 1086 MINNESOTA CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 21st day of September, 2018 ______________________________________________ Rory L. Synstelien Minnesota License No. 44565 Project No. 18246 SHEET 1 OF 1 16080 SCALE IN FEET 0 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com DESCRIPTION That part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated in Lot 44, Block 1, OSCAR ROBERTS FIRST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. which lies within the northerly 10.00 feet of said Lot 44. Page 458 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 9.1 Prepared By: Sharon Allison, City Clerk Item Type: Resolution Department: Administration Item Title: Resolution No. 2024-118: Accepting Donations Action Requested: Approve Resolution No. 2024-118 accepting donations. Information/Background: To comply with State Statute, all donations to the City must be accepted by resolution and approved by two-thirds majority of the Council. See attached resolution with list of donations. Supporting Documentation: 1. Resolution No. 2024-118: Accepting Donations Page 459 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-118 ACCEPTING DONATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EDINA WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 allows cities to accept grants and donations of real or personal property for the benefit of its citizens; WHEREAS, said donations must be accepted via a resolution of the Council adopted by a two thirds majority of its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council accepts with sincere appreciation the following listed grants and donations on behalf of its citizens. Edina Senior Center •Friends of the Edina Library $2,000.00 General Use •Donna Tilsner $50.00 General Use •Susan and Thomas Gerhard $25.00 General Use •Janie Hays $50.00 General Use •Moments Hospice 20 Prizes Prizes for Jingle Bingo Juneteenth Celebration •Friends of the Edina Library $1,600.00 Books at the Event Fire Department •Troy and Susan Perera $200.00 Scout Troop 3102 Egg Drop Dated: December 17, 2024 Attest: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this _______ day of ___________________, 2024. Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 460 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 9.2 Prepared By: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Engineering Item Title: Ordinance 2024-13: Amending Efficient Building Benchmarking Action Requested: Approve Ordinance No. 2024-13 amending Chapter 20, Article XI Efficient Building Benchmarking, grant first reading and waive second reading. Information/Background: The City of Edina passed the Efficient Building Benchmarking Ordinance in 2019, which requires owners of commercial, multifamily and public buildings 25,000 square feet or larger to report annual whole building energy and water use to benchmark their consumption. The ordinance also requires that buildings with a demonstrated energy efficiency potential to complete an energy assessment to motivate and inform improvement. During the 2023 Minnesota Legislative session, lawmakers passed a statewide Large Building Energy Benchmarking statute with an effective date of January 1, 2025. The statewide program will apply to all buildings 50,000 square feet or larger in Hennepin County plus other geographies noted in statute. In addition to establishing a statewide program, statute gives authority to the Minnesota Department of Commerce to coordinate local benchmarking programs, like Edina’s, and requires that local programs be as comprehensive in scope and application as the State program. Staff recommend several ordinance changes to better align our local benchmarking program with peer cities and to meet state statute requirements to continue to operate our local benchmarking program. One of the staff recommendations is to hand off benchmarking program management to the Department of Commerce for buildings 50,000 square feet and larger. The other recommendation is to update Edina's ordinance to be compliant with statute so that we can continue to manage small building benchmarking for properties that are excluded from the State program (i.e., properties 25,000-49,999 square feet). The attached staff report and draft amended ordinance summarizes the recommended updates to the Efficient Building Benchmarking ordinance to align with the State of Minnesota’s program and continue to support efficient buildings in Edina. Resources/Financial Impacts: • Budget – The Conservation and Sustainability (CAS) Fund supports implementation of Edina's benchmarking program. In 2024, the costs to the CAS Fund for the program were $54,200. • Implementation – To support implementation, the Sustainability Division contracts with TouchstoneIQ to provide support and technical assistance to building owners required to benchmark. • Operation – The Sustainability Division manages implementation of the benchmarking Page 461 of 1086 program. Relationship to City Policies: • Climate Action Plan, which identifies energy efficiency as a pathway to achieving our greenhouse gas reduction goals. Since Edina's benchmarking program was established in 2019 and existed during the development of the plan, it was not included as a Climate Action Plan strategy, but would be considered a strategy supportive of our Climate Action goals. Budget Pillar: Strong Foundation Values Impact: Sustainability Benchmarking helps property owners measure and track their building's energy and water use, indicating where opportunities for improvement are needed. Supporting Documentation: 1. Staff Report: Benchmarking Ordinance Amendments 2. Ord No 2024-13 Amending Chapt 20 Efficient Building Benchmarking Page 462 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Information / Background The City of Edina passed the Efficient Building Benchmarking Ordinance in 2019, which requires owners of commercial, multifamily and public buildings 25,000 square feet or larger to report annual whole building energy and water use to benchmark their consumption. The ordinance also requires that buildings with a demonstrated energy efficiency potential to complete an energy assessment to motivate and inform performance improvement. During the 2023 Minnesota Legislative session, lawmakers passed a statewide Large Building Energy Benchmarking statute with an effective date of January 1, 2025. The statewide program will apply to all buildings 50,000 square feet or larger in Hennepin County plus other geographies noted in statute. In addition to establishing a statewide program, statute gives authority to the Minnesota Department of Commerce to coordinate local benchmarking programs, like Edina’s. This report describes recommended updates to Edina’s Efficient Building Benchmarking ordinance to align with the State of Minnesota’s program and continue to support efficient buildings in Edina. Edina Benchmarking Program The Sustainability Division manages Edina’s benchmarking program, including contract and partner management, policy education, and data review. The City has an agreement with Touchstone IQ to administer the help desk, manage submissions and vet data, communicate ordinance compliance, update building owner information, create scorecards and an interactive map, and track overall compliance. In 2024, 268 Edina buildings were required to benchmark their building’s energy and water consumption. Almost 90% of buildings complied with the ordinance. The estimated total cost for implementation in 2024 is $54,200, which includes costs for the Touchstone IQ contract ($42,400), outreach printing and postage ($1,500), and energy assessment services ($10,300 as of Oct. 2024). The costs to implement the program come from the Conservation & Sustainability (CAS) Fund. Date: December 17, 2024 To: Mayor and City Council From: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Subject: Edina’s Efficient Buildings Benchmarking Ordinance and alignment with State of Minnesota Benchmarking Program Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance 2024-13, Amend Efficient Building Benchmarking, grant first reading, and waive second reading Page 463 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 State of Minnesota Program The Statewide Large Building Energy Benchmarking program is administered by the Minnesota Department of Commerce and requires annual whole building energy consumption reporting for buildings 50,000 square feet or larger in the following locations: • Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington Counties; and • Any city outside the metropolitan area with a population of over 50,000 residents that has one or more buildings with a square footage of 50,000 SF or more. The State program’s scope will include all buildings in Edina that are 50,000 sq ft and larger (also known as “Class 1” and “Class 2” buildings). Excluded from the State program are “Class 3” buildings that are smaller than 50,000 sq ft. These buildings can voluntarily participate in the State program, but are not required. Building Size State Program Participation Requirement Count of Edina Buildings Class 1, 100,000+ sq ft Yes 87 Class 2, 50,000–99,999 sq ft Yes 86 Class 3, 25,000–49,999 sq ft No 95 Statute grants authority to the Department of Commerce to coordinate local benchmarking ordinances, which includes a requirement that local ordinances must be equivalent or more stringent in scope and application as the State program. To continue to our local benchmarking ordinance, Edina must make updates to be equivalent or more stringent than the State program. Ordinance Amendment Recommendations Staff recommend several ordinance changes to better align with peer cities and with the Statewide program effective January 1, 2025. Staff consulted the Energy and Environment Commission at their November meeting about the need to update our local ordinance. They were supportive of handing off Class 1 and Class 2 to the State program (first recommendation) and keeping Class 3 buildings with the City program (second recommendation). The draft ordinance includes both recommended changes. Recommendation 1: Remove Class 1 and Class 2 from Local Ordinance The State of Minnesota will require all Class 1 and Class 2 buildings located in Hennepin County and other areas to annually benchmark their energy use. Department of Commerce staff will manage program implementation and have executed a contract with Touchstone IQ to provide HelpDesk services. The type of energy data required and software used for benchmarking will be the same as what Edina currently requires for its program, as will the level technical support available from Touchstone Page 464 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 IQ. To align with the State program and with peer cities, Staff recommend handing off program administration to the Department for Class 1 and Class 2 buildings. This change will result in: • Continued energy benchmarking for Edina buildings 50,000 sq ft and larger with the major change being the agency that manages and collects data from property owners. • Savings in both staff time and budget due to a reduced contract scope with Touchstone IQ. • Alignment with peer cities with local benchmarking ordinances who have decided to hand off their program administration to the Department for the same class of buildings (Bloomington, St. Louis Park, Rochester, Saint Paul). • Reduced confusion for building owners of Class 1 and Class 2 buildings in the metro area by creating consistency in the benchmarking program structure, managing agency and support contacts. If Council were to move forward with this change, Staff would notify Class 1 and Class 2 property owners of this change to reduce confusion and provide additional support on transitioning to the State contacts. Staff would also update its agreement with Touchstone IQ to reflect new scope of covered buildings. Recommendation 2: Add State Program Criteria to Continue to Manage Class 3 Benchmarking Locally Because the State of Minnesota will not require Class 3 buildings to benchmark their energy use, Staff recommend keeping Class 3 buildings in our ordinance to ensure continued energy benchmarking for Edina buildings 25,000 – 49,999 sq ft. The Department of Commerce and the City Attorney advised local ordinances must be updated to align with statute even if the building class affected is not include in statute (i.e., Class 3 buildings). Sustainability Staff consulted with the City Attorney to identify what criteria had to be updated in Edina’s ordinance and have identified the following updates: • Clarify notification, data disclosure and other compliance timelines. • Clarify quality assurance checks and data correction process. • Clarify availability of technical assistance and support for benchmarking. • Clarify utility participation and data requirements so that building owners can access data required by ordinance. • Provide onsite building disclosure materials for all benchmarked buildings. • Update exemption criteria to include properties with approved demolition permits and properties that have not received energy services for at least 30 days. • Require sellers to provide 12 months of benchmarking information at time of sale (property transfer) or benchmarking tool login access for new owners. • Clarify enforcement notification and update subsection to include civil fine as an alternative penalty for noncompliance. Page 465 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 These changes will result in: • Alignment with statute, as required, to continue to administer a local benchmarking program. • Continued energy benchmarking for Edina buildings 25,000 – 49,999 sq ft. • Continuing Edina’s sustainability leadership by being the only city currently to require benchmarking for Class 3 buildings. If Council were to move forward this recommendation, Staff would update its agreement to include support as needed for new requirements with Touchstone IQ and notify Class 3 buildings of the programmatic changes, such as the new exemption criteria and the disclosure of data during property transfers. Conclusion Staff recommend several ordinance changes to better align our local benchmarking program with peer cities and to meet state statute requirements to continue to operate our local benchmarking program. Handing off program management to the Department of Commerce for Class 1 and Class 2 buildings will result in CAS Fund budget and staff time savings, and create consistency across the metro area for building owners of properties this size in terms of reporting structure and managing agency. By keeping Class 3 buildings as “covered properties” in our local ordinance, Edina will continue its sustainability leadership and continue to support buildings in understanding their energy consumption. The recommended ordinance changes are required to be compliant with statute. Staff recommend Council approve Ordinance 2024-13 to amend the Efficient Building Benchmarking chapter, grant first reading, and waive second reading. Page 466 of 1086 ORDINANCE NO. 2024-13 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING EFFICIENT BUILDING BENCHMARKING The City of Edina Ordains: Chapter 20 Article XI of the Edina City Code is amended to provide as follows: Sec. 20-625. - Definitions. The following words shall have the meaning ascribed to them,unless the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Benchmark means to compare the measured energy performance of a building to itself, its peers, or to industry standards, with the goal of informing and motivating performance improvement. Benchmarking information means information related to a building's energy and water consumption as generated by the benchmarking tool, and descriptive information about the physical building, its operational characteristics, and energy and water consumption. The information shall include, but need not be limited to: (1)Building address; (2)Energy use intensity (EUI); (3)Annual greenhouse gas emissions; (4)The energy performance score that compares the energy use of the building to that of similar properties, where available. Benchmarking tool means the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Energy Star Portfolio Manager Tool or an equivalent tool adopted by the director. Property owner means an individual or entity possessing title to a building, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the property owner. City-owned building means any building, or group of buildings on the same tax lot, owned by the City of Edina containing 25,000 – 49,999 or more gross square feet of an occupancy use other than industrial. Covered property means any property of occupancy uses other than industrial that has one or more buildings containing in sum the gross square feet shall be classified in the following classes: Class Property Size (in square feet) 1 100,000 and greater 2 50,000-99,999 3 25,000 - 49,999 Page 467 of 1086 2 Director means the individual appointed by the city manager. Energy means electricity, natural gas, steam, heating oil, or other product sold by a utility for use in a building, or renewable on-site electricity generation, for purposes of providing heating, cooling, lighting, water heating, or for powering or fueling other end-uses in the building and related facilities. Energy-saving assessment means a systematic process of identifying and developing modifications and improvements of the base building systems, including but not limited to alterations of such systems and the installation of new equipment, insulation or other generally recognized energy and water efficiency technologies to optimize energy and water use performance of the building and achieve energy and water savings, provided that such process shall be at least as stringent as or comparable to the Level I Energy Survey and Engineering Analysis of the most recent edition of Procedures for Commercial Building Energy Audits published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers Inc. (ASHRAE) or as otherwise determined by the director and such process for water systems shall be as determined by the director. Energy performance score means the numeric rating generated by the Energy Star Portfolio Manager tool or equivalent tool adopted by the director that compares the energy usage of the building to that of similar buildings. Energy Star Portfolio Manager means the tool developed and maintained by the United States Environmental Protection Agency to track and assess the relative energy performance of buildings nationwide. Gross square footage means total building floor area of all conditioned space calculated from overall exterior wall dimensions of all below and above grade floors. Industrial means manufacturing, compounding, processing, packaging, treatment and assembly of products and materials. Property owner means an individual or entity possessing title to a building, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the property owner. Tenant means a person or entity occupying or holding possession of a building or premises pursuant to a rental agreement. Utility means an entity that distributes and sells natural gas, electric, or thermal energy services for buildings. Water means supplied, metered potable water for mixed use and irrigation uses. Sec. 20-626. - Benchmarking required for city-owned properties. No later than August first,2019,and no later than every June first thereafter,each city-owned building shall be benchmarked for the previous calendar year in the benchmarking tool.Using the benchmarking tool’s automated data quality assurance functions,the Director will correct missing or incorrect data with 30 days of notification of the inaccuracy for city-owned buildings. Sec. 20-627. - Benchmarking required for covered properties. Property owners shall annually benchmark for the previous calendar year each covered property and obtain an energy performance score as available in the benchmarking tool.Using the benchmarking tool’s automated data quality assurance functions,property owners will Page 468 of 1086 3 correct missing or incorrect data with 30 days of notification of the inaccuracy. Benchmarking will be completed for according to the following schedule: (1)All Class 1 and Class 2 covered properties by June first, 2020 and by every June first thereafter; (2)all Class 3 covered properties by June first, 2021 and by every June first thereafter. The Director shall notify property owners required to comply with this section by March first of each year. The failure of the City to provide such notice does not relieve the property owner from compliance with benchmarking requirements. Property owners may contact the Director for technical assistance, training, or assistance with using the benchmarking tool or managing benchmarked data. Sec. 20-628. - Disclosure and publication of benchmarking information. The property owner shall annually provide benchmarking information to the Director,in such form as established by the Director's rule,by the date provided by the schedule in subsections 20-627. Sec. 20-629. Utility data requirements. This section incorporates the utility data requirements under Minn. Stat. § 216C.331, subd. 8 for all utilities responsible for data that may be established, used, or maintained for the benchmarking program established by this Chapter. Sec. 20-630. – Data collection and management. The City shall collect benchmarking information and rank benchmarked properties by their energy performance score from worst to best energy performance score. The City shall provide each owner of benchmarked property with a written notice of the property’s star ranking and energy performance score by December first each year. Sec. 20-629631. - Benchmarking information made available to public. The Director shall make readily available to the public,and update annually,benchmarking information for the previous calendar year according to the following schedule: (1)Each city-owned property by August 30, 2020 and by every August 30th December first thereafter; (2)Each Class 1 and Class 2 covered property by August 30, 2021 and by every August 30th thereafter; (2)Each Class 3 covered property by August 30, 2022 and by every December first thereafter; Sec. 20-630632. - Property information made available to public. The Director shall make available to the public,and update at least annually,the following information about city-owned properties and covered properties by December first of each year: (1)Summary statistics on energy consumption derived from aggregation of bench Page 469 of 1086 4 marking information for properties; (2)Summary statistics on overall compliance with this section; (3)For each property: a.The status of compliance with the requirements of this chapter; b.Annual summary statistics for the property,including address,total energy use, energy use intensity,annual greenhouse gas emissions,and an energy performance score where available,and star ranking based on energy performance score where available; c.Disclosure material of the covered property’s summary statistics that each property owner must prominently display for the public at the covered property. Sec. 20-631633. - Energy assessment requirement. Covered properties with energy and water efficiency improvement potential shall submit proof of an energy assessment having been performed according to the schedule below.The assessment must have been performed within the last five (5)years and must include recommendations for energy and water savings opportunities.Qualifying proof that an evaluation has been performed shall be established by rules set at discretion by the Director. The Director shall also establish energy standards in the rules that define buildings requiring an assessment.Properties shall submit proof of energy assessment according to the following schedule: (1)All Class 1 covered properties by June first, 2022 and by June first every fifth year thereafter; (2)All Class 2 covered properties by June first, 2023 and by June first every fifth year thereafter; All Class 3 covered properties by June December first, 2024 and by June December first every fifth year thereafter shall submit proof of an energy assessment. Sec. 20-632634. - Exemptions. The Director may exempt a property owner from the benchmarking and energy assessment requirements of subsection (c) this section if the property owner submits documentation establishing any of the following: a)A building's primary use is industrial, measured by square footage dedicated to industrial use or energy use. If more than 50 percent of square footage is dedicated to industrial use, or more than 50 percent of building energy use is dedicated to industrial processes, the building owner may request an exemption. In order to qualify for an exemption, the property owner must permit the city to complete an inspection of the property; or b)The property is presently experiencing qualifying financial distress in that the property is the subject of a qualified tax lien sale or public auction due to property tax arrearages, the property is controlled by a court-appointed receiver based on financial distress, the property is owned by a financial institution through default by the borrower, the property has been acquired by a deed in lieu of foreclosure, or the property has a senior mortgage which is subject to a notice of default; or Page 470 of 1086 5 c)The property or areas of the property subject to the requirements of this section have been less than 50 percent occupied during the calendar year for which benchmarking is required; or d)The property does not have a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy for all 12 months of the calendar year for benchmarking is required; or (e)The property was issued a demolition permit during the previous calendar year that remains current; or (f)The property received no energy services for at least 30 days during the previous calendar year. An exemption granted under this section applies only to a single calendar year. A property owner must reapply to the Director each year an extension is sought. Sec. 20-633635. - Data to be provided to property owner. Where aggregate data is not available,tenants located in a covered property subject to this chapter shall,within thirty (30)days of a request by the property owner and in a form to be approved by the Director,provide all information that cannot otherwise be acquired by the propertyowner and that is needed by the property owner to comply with the requirements of this section. A property owner who is selling a covered property must provide the following to the new owner at the time of sale: a)benchmarking information for the most recent 12-month period,including monthly energy use by source; or b)ownership of the digital property record in the benchmarking tool through an online transfer. Sec. 20-634636. - Violations. It shall be unlawful for any entity or person to fail to comply with the requirements of this section or to misrepresent any material fact in a document required to be prepared or disclosed by this section.In addition to or instead of any criminal penalties available,the City may impose a $1,000.00 civil penalty pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 216C.331, subd. 16 for such violations. Sec. 20-635637. - Enforcement. The Director shall enforce the provisions of this section.If it is determined that a property owner or any person subject to the provisions of this section fails to meet any requirement of this section,the Director shall mail a warning notice to the property owner or person by June 15 each year.The notice shall specify the reasons why the property owner or person fails to meet the requirements set forth in this section.The notice shall indicate that the property owner has until July 15 of that same year to bring the covered property into compliance,unless the owner requests and receives an extension until August 15 of that same year.forty-five (45)business days to comply with the applicable requirement. If any property owner or person fails,omits,neglects,or refuses to comply with the provisions of this section after the period of compliance provided for in the required warning notice the City shall have cause for the denial,suspension,revocation or refusal to issue any applicable business license held by the property owner or person,and may subject the property owner or Page 471 of 1086 6 person to the penalties described in Sec.20-636.This section may also be enforced by injunction,abatement,mandamus,or any other appropriate remedy in any court of competent jurisdiction. Effective Date : January 1, 2025 First Reading: December 17, 2024 Second Reading: Waived Published: Attest Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on Send two affidavits of publication Bill to Edina City Clerk Page 472 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 9.3 Prepared By: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Community Development Item Title: Resolution Nos. 2024-107 & 2024-108: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances for 6016 Vernon Avenue Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-107 approving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. (4/5 vote required) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-108 approving Preliminary Rezoning and Site Plan with multiple variances. (3/5 vote required) Information/Background: The applicant, Jake Schaffer of Station Pizza, is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into a 1,685 square foot, 20-seat restaurant. The new restaurant would be a Station Pizza with indoor dining, take-out and delivery service. The existing site is zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District, which allows only automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. Restaurants are allowed uses in the PCD-1, Planned Commercial Zoning District. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential use. To accommodate the request, the following is required: • A Comprehensive Plan Amendment from MDR, Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial (a new land use designation). • A Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District 4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District 1, with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than 1 acre in size. • Site Plan Review with the following Variances: o A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. o A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. o Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. Resources/Financial Impacts: Relationship to City Policies: Supporting Documentation: 1. Planning Commission Staff Report - November 13, 2024 2. Engineering Memo 3. Updated Site Plans with added Parking Stalls Page 473 of 1086 4. Proposed Plans and Renderings 5. Applicant Narrative 6. Traffic and Parking Study 103124 7. Site Location, Zoning & Comp. Plan 8. Site Buildable Area - Meeting Required Setbacks 9. Requested Variances, Buildable Area and Previous Restaurant Proposal 10. MPCA Letters 11. Staff Presentation at Planning Commission 12. Res. No. 2024-107 (Denial) 13. Res. No. 2024-107 (Approval) 14. Res. No. 2024-108 (Denial) 15. Res. No. 2024-108 (Approval) 16. Allowed Uses in the PCD-1 Zoning District. 17. Better Together Public Input Report Page 474 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 1 November 13, 2024 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances – 6016 Vernon Avenue Information / Background: The applicant, Jake Schaffer of Station Pizza, is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into a 1,685 square foot, 20-seat restaurant. The new restaurant would be a Station Pizza with indoor dining, take-out and delivery service. The existing site is zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District, which allows only automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. Restaurants are allowed uses in the PCD-1, Planned Commercial Zoning District. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential use. To accommodate the request, the following is required: ➢A Comprehensive Plan Amendment from MDR, Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial (a new land use designation). ➢A Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District 4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District 1, with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than 1 acre in size. ➢Site Plan Review with the following Variances: 1. A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. 2. A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. 3. Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. Page 475 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Because the use is not allowed on the site, and a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required, the City has complete discretion to approve or deny the request. (See attached pyramid of discretion.) The applicant has gone through the sketch plan process and per the attached applicant narrative have made the following changes to the plans. ➢Created indoor seating for 20 people. ➢Added a building addition on the west side of the building for dry storage/coolers. ➢Created a paved area for bike parking on the north side of the building. ➢Added tandem parking for employees. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District and guided Low Density Residential. Easterly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District and guided Low Density Residential. Southerly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District and guided Low Density Residential. Westerly: Apartments/Condos; zoned PRD-3, Planned Residential District and guided Medium Density Residential. Existing Site Features The subject property is 16,373 square feet in size and contains a single-story two-bay auto repair shop, accessory buildings and parking lot. The main building was constructed in 1957 and the site was also used as a gas station until the early 1990’s. In 1992 the gas pumps were removed, and soil pollution remediation was done. The cleanup was satisfactorily done, and no further action was required by the MPCA. (See attached documentation from the MPCA.) Planning Guide Plan designation: MDR, Medium Density Residential Zoning: PCD-4, Planned Commercial District – 4 Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment This site is unique in Edina in that it is, and has been zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District for the automotive repair use and gas station, however, it is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for Medium Density Residential. The Comprehensive Plan designation has been in place at least since 1980 when that Comprehensive was adopted. Staff assumes that when that Comprehensive Plan land use designation was established to match the existing medium density multi-family housing located to the west. Page 476 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 3 To accommodate the request, a Comprehensive Plan amendment is requested to change the future land use designation from Medium Density Residential to NC, Neighborhood Commercial, which would be a new land use category in the Comprehensive Plan, which would accommodate a small-scale commercial use. Below shows the proposed change: Below is the potential new land use category for a “Neighborhood Commercial” designation and the current designation of the site, MDR, Medium Density Residential designation: NC Neighborhood Commercial Primary uses: small scale retail/commercial uses. Building footprints are generally less than 2,000 sq. ft. (or less for individual storefronts). Floor to area ratio per zoning code. MDR Medium- Density Residential Applies to attached housing (townhouses, quads, etc.) and multi-family complexes of moderate density. May also include small institutional uses. In new development or redevelopment, improve integration of multi-family housing into an interconnected street network and work to create an attractive, pedestrian- friendly street edge. 5 – 12 residential dwelling units/acre Existing Land Use Plan Site Site Proposed Land Use Plan Change Existing ProposedNeighborhood Commercial Page 477 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 4 Based on the size of the subject property and the density allowed in the MDR Districts, four (4) units could be constructed on the subject property. However, given the odd shape, small size and restrictive setbacks required with two of three street frontages, variances would be needed redevelop the site with housing. (See the attached graphic showing the buildable area for the site.) This site is similar in size to the property at 4404 Valley View Road that received City approval to build 4 townhomes. That site is 11,691 square feet in size, while the subject property is 16,373 square feet in size. Rezoning Per Section 36-216 of the City Code, the Commission may recommend approval by the council based upon, but not limited to, the factors below. As mentioned previously with a Rezoning and a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the City has complete discretion to approve or deny this request. A case can be made for approval and denial on this one. (See alternatives on pages 11-14 in this report.) Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed rezoning is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; therefore, an amendment is requested. The current Comprehensive Plan designation is for medium density attached residential which is described as “attached housing (townhouses, quads, etc.) and multi- family complexes of moderate density. May also include small institutional uses. As mentioned, 4 units would the maximum density allowed on the site. Will not be detrimental to properties surrounding the tract. If the site plan is properly designed for a restaurant and hours of operation are regulated, the use itself may not be detrimental to a residential neighborhood. Hours of operation are proposed to be 11 AM – 9 PM Sunday through Thursday, and 11 AM – 10 PM on Friday and Saturday. Future expansion of the building would be a concern. The parking regulations and setback requirements would provide the City with some safeguards regarding any expansion. Any expansion of the building would require a variance to the parking and setback regulations. That would be a decision for a future planning commission and/or City Council to make. Will not result in an overly intensive land use. Again, a case can be made either way for this standard. As mentioned above, with appropriate regulations on the site the use could fit in well in the neighborhood and be an asset as a local food option. The proposed parking would meet the minimum parking standards, and the traffic study determined that the existing roads would support the restaurant. There is adequate separation between buildings and the site would be screened by landscaping and fencing. Will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards. Traffic study was done by Stantec and concludes that the existing roadways can support the project. (See attached traffic study.) Page 478 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 5 Conforms to the provisions of this section and other applicable provisions of this Code. The site plan proposed for the Rezoning does not conform to several provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Variances are requested as noted in the compliance table on page 7 of this report. Provides a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. As mentioned above, there are several variances requested, including a building expansion to extend to the west. However, the closest adjacent structure would be 105+/- feet away and would be screened by fencing and landscaping. Site Plan Review Parking Based on the City Code requirement, Section 36-1311, the proposed parking spaces meet City Code. A 1,684 square foot, 20-seat restaurant with 7 employees on a maximum shift would require 24 stalls. The applicant is offering 24 stalls, plus 3 tandem stalls for employees. The applicant is also proposing bike rack space for up to 20 bikes. (See attached site plan.) A parking study was conducted by Stantec and concluded that there would be adequate parking. (See attached study.) Site Circulation/Access/Traffic Primary access to the proposed development would be off Vernon Avenue, by the two existing access points. Stantec conducted a traffic study. The study concludes that the existing roadways can be supported by the project. (See attached traffic study.) Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site, 17 overstory trees would be required. The proposed plans show 30 existing and proposed overstory trees on site. A full complement of understory shrubs and bushes are also proposed. The applicant is proposing a cedar fence to provide screening the residential area to the north and west. Per Section 36-1457 (4) of the Zoning Ordinance: “Off-street parking facilities containing six or more spaces and all loading facilities shall be screened from streets located within 50 feet, and from lots which are used for any residential purpose which are located within 50 feet. Said distance shall be the shortest distance between the parking facility or loading facility and the nearest part of the street or the nearest lot line of the residential lot.” This site is located within 50 feet of residential uses to the west and north but would be screened. Trash Enclosure Trash storage facilities, including recycling storage facilities, shall be screened from all lot lines and public road rights-of-way. As proposed, the trash enclosure would be located within the building, in the southwest corner, within the addition. Page 479 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 6 Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be generally subject to the comments and conditions outlined in the attached memo. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, as they are the City’s review authority over the grading of the site. Building/Building Material The building material of the existing building is metal panel and tile. The proposed addition is designed to match with metal and cementitious panels. The project would meet the City Code provision regarding expansion of existing buildings. Per Section 36-617 (11) f. “All subsequent additions, exterior alterations and accessory buildings constructed after the erection of an original building shall be constructed of the same materials as the original building and shall be designed in a manner conforming to the original architectural design and general appearance.” Mechanical Equipment Any new rooftop and/or ground level equipment would have to be screened if visible from adjacent property lines. Loading Dock/Trash Enclosures Loading area would be within the existing parking areas. The trash enclosure is located on the south end of the building. Living Streets/Multi-Modal Consideration Sec. 36-1274. - Sidewalks, trails and bicycle facilities. (a) In order to promote and provide safe and effective sidewalks and trails in the City and encourage the use of bicycles for recreation and transportation, the following improvements are required, as a condition of approval, on developments requiring the approval of a final development plan or the issuance of a conditional use permit pursuant to article V of this chapter: (1) It is the policy of the City to require the construction of sidewalks and trails wherever feasible so as to encourage pedestrian and bicycle connectivity throughout the City. Therefore, developments shall provide sidewalks and trails which adjoin the applicant's property: a. In locations shown on the City's sidewalk and trail plan; and b. In other locations where the council finds that the provision of such sidewalks and trails enhance public access to mass transit facilities or connections to other existing or planned sidewalks, trails or public facilities. (2) Developments shall provide sidewalks between building entrances and sidewalks or trails which exist or which will be constructed pursuant to this section. (3) Developments shall provide direct sidewalk and trail connections with adjoining properties where appropriate. (4) Developments must provide direct sidewalk and trail connections to transit stations or transit stops adjoining the property. (5) Design standards for sidewalks and trails shall be prescribed by the engineer. (6) Nonresidential developments having an off-street automobile parking requirement of 20 or more spaces must provide off-street bicycle parking spaces where bicycles may be parked Page 480 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 7 and secured from theft by their owners. The minimum number of bicycle parking spaces required shall be five percent of the automobile parking space requirement. The design and placement of bicycle parking spaces and bicycle racks used to secure bicycles shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. Whenever possible, bicycle parking spaces shall be located within 50 feet of a public entrance to a principal building. (b) The expense of the improvements set forth in subsection (a) of this section shall be borne by the applicant. The City’s Comprehensive Plan identifies a new sidewalk on the north side of Vernon Avenue between Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard to Olinger Road/Highwood Drive. Therefore, a boulevard-style sidewalk should be installed on the site, should this proposal be approved per the attached engineering memo. Compliance Table City Standard (PCD- 1) Proposed Structure Setbacks Front – Vernon Front – Eden Prairie Road (patio) Front – Eden Prairie Road (Addition) Side – West (Addition) Parking & Drive-aisle Setbacks Front – Vernon Front – Eden Prairie Road Side – West Space between building and parking area 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 25 feet 20 feet 20 feet 10 feet 10 feet 40 feet (30 feet existing)** 9 feet* 20 feet* 13 feet* 1 Foot** 3 feet** (Variance for handicap stall) 20 feet 0**&* Height 2-1/2 stories and 30 feet 1 story Parking Stalls Restaurant = 1 stall per 100 s.f. + number of employees on max shift (24 total stalls required) 24 stalls Lot Size (Restaurant in PCD-1)1 acre 16,373 s.f. FAR 1.0 .13% *Variance Required **Existing Condition Page 481 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 8 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues For this project, the City of Edina has complete discretion to approve or deny this request. A case can be made for both approval and denial of this project. Findings for both approval and denial of this project are provided for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider. (See page 11-14 of this report.) As outlined below, staff is recommending approval of this proposal, however it is primarily due to the fact that the site is currently zoned for auto oriented uses (PCD-4) like the gas station and auto repair station that have existed on the site for 50+ years, and this proposed use could be considered a less intensive land use with a PCD-1 Zoning. Primary Issues •Is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment reasonable? Yes. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a small-scale restaurant. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be consistent with the existing commercial zoning on the site. 2. The existing zoning is PCD-4, which allows automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. The Metropolitan Council requires cities to have their land use plan within the Comprehensive Plan, consistent with their zoning designations. 3. The amendment creates a new smaller scale land use category that is currently not included in the Comprehensive Plan. The closest existing category is the NN, Neighborhood Node. This site is too small to be considered a node. 4. The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is more compatible with adjacent land uses than the previous gas station and automobile service station located on the site. The use would be more intensive in terms of traffic generated and activity on the site. (120 daily trips for a 1,200 s.f. automobile care center and 181 daily trips for the restaurant.) Green space and landscaping would be added to improve the visual appeal of the site. The existing fence that is in a very poor condition would be replaced by a 6-foot-tall cedar fence. The fence would be located along the north and west lot lines to provide screening. The existing building would be used rather than tearing it down and replacing it. The proposal would be an improvement to the site compared to current conditions. 5. The proposed use would be supported by the existing roads. The number of vehicular trips to the site would have minimal impact on the existing roads. (See page 7-1 of the traffic study.) Page 482 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 9 •Is the proposed Rezoning to PCD-1 reasonable? Yes. Staff supports the request for the following reasons: 1. If the Comprehensive Plan Amendment were approved, the findings for rezoning per Section 36-216 of the City Code would be met. 2. The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a small-scale restaurant and reuse and restoration of the existing building. 3. If the site plan is properly designed for a restaurant and hours of operation are regulated, the use itself would not be detrimental to the adjacent residential neighborhood. Hours of operation are proposed to be 11am-9pm Sunday through Thursday and 11am-10pm on Friday and Saturday. Hours could be further regulated through a liquor license or the rezoning. 4. Parking regulations and setback requirements would provide the City with some safeguards regarding any expansion and intensification of the use. The proposed parking would meet the minimum parking standards, and the traffic study determined that the existing roads would support the restaurant. 5. There is adequate separation between buildings and the site would be screened by landscaping and fencing to minimize impact on adjacent properties. •Are the proposed Variances justified? Yes. Subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, staff believes that the Variances requested with this project are reasonable and meet the variance criteria as outlined below. ➢The existing use on the property has been commercial for over 50 years. The re-zoning would be generally consistent with existing zoning on the site. ➢The closest adjacent structure would be 105+/- feet away and would be screened by fencing and landscaping. ➢The practical difficulties include the existing small lot size, irregular shape of the lot and street frontages on two of the three sides. ➢It would be difficult to build anything on this site without a variance, due to the small size and shape of the lot. (See attached buildable area.) ➢The proposed Cedar Fence along the west and north lot lines would minimize impact on the adjacent residential use to the north and west. ➢The proposal would be an improvement over existing conditions and use of the site. Minnesota Statutes and Section 36-98 of the Edina Zoning Ordinance require that a variance shall not be granted unless the following findings are made: 1. The variances would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Ariticle 1. – In General; Section 36-1 – Findings state “Through the enactment of the Page 483 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 10 ordinance from which this chapter is derived, the council intends to implement this statement of philosophy so as to provide for the orderly and planned development and redevelopment of lands and waters in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to preserve and enhance the high quality residential character of the city and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare.” Section. 36-2 Objectives of the Zoning Ordinance includes: ➢Control the use, development and expansion of certain nonresidential uses in the Single Dwelling Unit District in order to reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such nonresidential uses. ➢Encourage orderly development, use and maintenance of office, commercial and industrial uses which are compatible with the residential character of the city. ➢Recognize and distinguish commercial districts at the neighborhood level, the community level and the regional level, so as to provide retail establishments compatible in use and scale with surrounding properties, especially those used for residential purposes. ➢Establish standards for landscaping and screening to contribute to the beauty of the community, add to the urban forest and buffer incompatible uses from one another. By adding conditions to minimize impacts on adjacent property, such as landscaping, screening, limiting hours of operation the intent of the ordinances could be met. 2. The variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, the proposal would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Below is the land use categories and description. 3. There are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. The term “practical difficulties” means the following: i. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. “Practical difficulties” may include functional and aesthetic concerns. These variances are reasonable given the existing small size of the site, the triangular shape of the site, and two lot frontages. The use would be reasonably screened by landscaping and fencing and located 105 feet to the building to the west. The existing use of the site is commercial. There are other restaurants in Edina on property that is Zoned PCD-1 that are less than one acre. Those include Convention Grill, Hello Pizza, Town Hall Station. NC Neighborhood Commercial Primary uses: small scale retail/commercial uses. Building footprints are generally less than 2,000 sq. ft. (or less for individual storefronts). Floor to area ratio per zoning code. Page 484 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 11 ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Yes. The unique circumstances including the small lot size, location of existing building, unique shape, existing zoning being commercial (PCD-4) and the Comprehensive Plan designation of multi-family residential are not created by the landowner. iii. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances would not alter the essential character of the locality. The existing use has been automobile repair with outside storage. The remodeling of the building, upgrading of the parking lot, added landscaping and fencing would improve the look of the site, which would remain commercial. Options for consideration For this project, the Planning Commission and City Council have complete discretion to approve or deny the request. A case can be made for both approval and denial of this project. The following outlines alternatives for the Planning Commission to consider. Denial Comprehensive Plan Recommend the City Council deny the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide the site from MDR, Medium Density Residential to NC, Neighborhood Commercial. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The subject property is too small to accommodate all that is being proposed on the site. As proposed, with the number of variances being requested, the restaurant would be an overly intensive use for the site. 2. The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is not compatible with the adjacent residential land uses. The variances proposed are significant. 3. The site is currently guided for Medium Density Residential land uses. Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances Recommend the City Council Deny the Rezoning from PCD-4 to PCD-1, Site Plan Review and Variances. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal does not meet the Rezoning findings Per Section 36-216 of the City Code. specifically: a) The proposal is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. Page 485 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 12 b) The site plan would be detrimental to properties given the large variances requested, lack of green space, setback and separation from residential uses, potential parking issues and vehicle maneuvering in and out of the site. c) Will result in an overly intensive land use. d) Does not conform to the provisions of the City Code. e) Does not “provide a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. 2. The Variance criteria has not been met. There are no practical difficulties that prohibit reasonable use of the property. 3. The practical difficulty is caused by the applicant’s desire for a restaurant that does not fit properly on the site to minimize impacts on adjacent properties. 4. PCD Zoning District minimum area for restaurants is 1 acre in size. Approval Comprehensive Plan Recommend the City Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide the site from MDR, Medium Density Residential to NC, Neighborhood Commercial. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is more compatible with adjacent land uses than the previous gas station and automobile service station located on the site. The existing building would be used rather than tearing it down and replacing it. The proposal would be an improvement to the site compared to current conditions. 2. The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a restaurant. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment would then be consistent with the existing commercial zoning on the site. 3. The proposed amendment would allow a re-development of a commercial property that would be an amenity serving the area. A restaurant would be a community gathering space for this neighborhood which does not have this type of use in the area. 4. With the requirement of an 8-foot cedar fence located along the west and north lot lines and the landscaping proposed, the project would be screened from adjacent residential land uses to minimize impacts. Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances Recommend the City Council Approve the Rezoning from PCD-4 to PCD-1, Site Plan Review and Page 486 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 13 Variances. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The re-zoning would be generally consistent with existing commercial zoning on the site. 2. The proposed variances are reasonable given the practical difficulties associated with the site including the triangular shape of the site, street frontage on two sides, and the lots small size. 3. The project would include a restoration of the existing building; the expansion area would the west, where the nearest building would be 105+/- feet away. 4. The proposed Cedar Fence along the west and north lot lines would minimize impact on the adjacent residential use to the north and west. 5. The proposal would be an improvement over existing conditions and use of the site. 6. There are other restaurants in Edina on property that is Zoned PCD-1 and are less than one acre. Those include Convention Grill, Hello Pizza, Town Hall Station. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Final Site Plans must be consistent with the Preliminary Site Plans dated October 22, 2024. 2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built. 3. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city engineer’s memo dated November 4, 2024. 4. Approval of a Site Improvement Performance Agreement at Final approval, 5. Variances are subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Final Rezoning and Final Site Plan approval by City Council. 6. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. 7. Final Rezoning is contingent on the Metropolitan Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. 8. An eight-foot cedar fence must be installed and maintained along the west and north lot line as proposed to provide screening from adjacent properties. 9. A boulevard-style sidewalk must be constructed along Vernon Avenue. Sidewalk must be 6 Page 487 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 14 feet minimum width with a 5-foot minimum width boulevard. 10. Hours of construction shall be limited to: Monday – Friday 7 A.M. to 7 P.M. Saturdays – 9A.M. to 5 P.M. Sundays and Holidays – No Work Allowed. 11. Hours of operation shall be determined at the time of final approvals and would be subject to any conditions established as part of a liquor license. 13. Noise from the site shall be subject to the city's noise regulations in accordance article II, division 5 of chapter 23. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Site Plan and Variances subject to the findings above. Deadline for a City decision: February 4, 2025 Page 488 of 1086 DATE: 11/4/2024 TO: 6016 Vernon Ave, Owner and Development Team CC: Cary Teague – Community Development Director FROM: Chad Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Ross Bintner, Engineering Services Manager RE: 6016 Vernon Ave – Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for pedestrian facilities, utility connections, grading, and storm water. Plans reviewed were dated September 13, 2024. Review Comment Required For General 1. The applicant is renovating the existing building and parking lot. A 423 SF addition and 6 additional parking stalls are proposed. General Comment Survey 2. Show all existing and proposed public and private easements if applicable. General Comment Living Streets 3. Sidewalk required along Vernon Avenue – 6-ft minimum width with a 5-ft minimum width boulevard connecting to the existing sidewalk near Highwood Drive. This sidewalk will be maintained by the City after construction. Grading/Building Permit 4. Staff recommends a more direct pedestrian connection (in the form of a 5’ minimum width sidewalk) between the building and Eden Prairie Road to promote multi-modal connectivity with the adjacent residential neighborhood. This sidewalk would be maintained by the property owner. Grading/Building Permit 5. Design sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. Grading/Building Permit 6. Saw cut concrete sidewalk joints on public sidewalks. Grading/Building Permit Traffic and Street 7. The traffic study estimates 15 and 181 additional trips during the p.m. peak and daily, respectively. The existing roadway systems General Comment Page 489 of 1086 can handle these additional trips. No proposed roadway improvements are required as part of this project. 8. Review fire access requirements with fire department. Grading/Building Permit 9. ROW permit from Hennepin County may be required for any driveway entrance replacements. Comply with City standard plate 410 where possible. Any road patching shall conform to Hennepin County standards. General Comment 10. Proposed trees, vegetation, signage and other items adjacent to intersections should maintain a clear view zone as defined in Section 26-190 of City Code. Grading/Building Permit 11. Bicycle parking stalls shall be in convenient, well-lit locations within 50’ of a public entrance to the building. Rack style and spacing for surface parking should follow the recommendations of the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP). General Comment 12. Applicant should review turning movements and travel routes for delivery vehicles. Steps should be taken to minimize the impact of delivery vehicles on pedestrian movement through the site (additional signage, designated delivery zones, etc.). General Comment Sanitary and Water Utilities 13. Application shows no changes to sanitary sewer and water utilities. General Comment 14. A SAC determination will be required by the Metropolitan Council. The SAC determination will be used by the City to calculate sewer and water connection charges. Grading/Building Permit 15. Verified sealed well located onsite. General Comment Storm Water Utility 16. Provide copy of permit from Nine Mile Creek WD. Grading/Building Permit 17. Provide copy of maintenance agreement in favor of Nine Mile Creek WD. Grading/Building Permit 18. Provide As-built record of rain garden. Final / Permit Closure Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 19. A SWPPP consistent with the State General Construction Site Stormwater Permit is required. Grading/Building Permit Sustainability 20. The Sustainable Building Policy would not apply. Applicant is encouraged to take advantage of the City’s free energy General Comment Page 490 of 1086 assessment program to increase the building’s energy efficiency and access utility and city rebates. Other Agency Coordination 21. MDH, MPCA and MCES permits required as needed. Grading/Building Permit 22. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit may be required. General Comment Page 491 of 1086 City Submittal Set 001Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 6016 Vernon Avenue South, Edina, MN Project Narrative This project is a proposed redevelopment of the property at 6016 Vernon Ave. S, which was previously Kevin Kee's automotive repair shop, into a Station Pizzeria restaurant with take-out, delivery, and limited dine-in services. The scope of the work would include a full interior renovation of the existing building, updating the building's exterior, and all new landscaping and paving. A concrete pad at the rear of the building will be extended to provide space for walk-in coolers and dry storage, as well as a trash enclosure. The proposed design will extensively beautify and screen the property from the surrounding single- family homes, while scrubbers on the exhaust hoods will also mitigate any aromas. Sufficient parking for both cars and bikes will be provided, to avoid any encroachment or congestion onto adjacent neighborhood streets. Creating a Station Pizzeria on this site would provide a valuable amenity and gathering space in a neighborhood that currently lacks walkable/bikeable dining options. Gross Building Area Phase Area Existing 1262 SF New 423 SF Total Area 1685 SF Parking Stall Type Count Accessible 1 Standard 26 Total Stalls 27 Proposed Hours of Operation: Sunday - Thursday: 11am - 9pm Friday - Saturday: 11am - 10pm Includes (3) tandem stalls, see Site Plan Page 492 of 1086 PRD-3 PRD-3 R-2 PRD-2 R-1 R-1 Site Proposed PCD-1 Low Density Residential Site M e d iu m D e n s ity R e s id e n tia lProposed Neighborhood Commercial Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential L o w D e n s ity A tta c h e d R e s id e n tia l002Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Zoning Analysis Development Summary: Zoning District: Min. Front Yard Setback: Min. Side Yard Setback: Min. Rear Yard Setback: Max. Height: Max. F.A.R. Site Information Address: PID: Site Area: Existing Ord. PCD-4 35' 25' 25' 3 stories (36') 0.3 Proposed PCD-1 35' 25' 25' 3 stories (36') 1.0 6016 Vernon Ave S Edina, MN, 55436 3211721230027 16,373 SF (0.38 acres) Current Zoning PCD-4 Planned Commercial District The current zoning for the site at 6016 Vernon Ave. S is PCD-4, which allows the previous use of automobile service centers, as well as carwashes and gas stations. The proposed re-zoning to PCD-1 would retain the site as commercial zoning, but would allow a restaurant as a principal use for the site. Current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Medium-Density Residential In the Edina 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Future Land Use map shows this site as Medium Density Residential. As none of the other categories accurately describe this unique site, the project proposes creating a new category, Neighborhood Commercial, intended to denote small commercial uses directly serving the surrounding neighborhood. The site is adjacent to the Low Density Attached and Medium Density Residential areas in the neighborhood along Vernon Ave. It would serve these more concentrated populations as well as the surrounding Low Density Residential. Proposed Zoning PCD-1 Planned Commercial District Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Neighborhood Commercial Page 493 of 1086 003Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Site Context This site is located along Vernon Avenue, a main road in this part of Edina, among residential neighborhoods. By extending the sidewalk on Vernon Ave. along the site, it will create a more complete path for pedestrians from the immediate neighborhood to visit the pizzeria. Vernon Ave. also has a bike lane and the site is relatively close to Bredesen Park, which has many paths for walking and cycling. This proposal will include bike parking to make it convenient for cyclists to visit as well. Pedestrian Circulation Bike Lane Sidewalk Amenity Key Park Trail Future SidewalkSite Page 494 of 1086 004Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Existing Conditions Existing Building The existing building and parking lot have been vacant for multiple years and are accordingly in a state of disrepair. The existing exterior materials consist of metal panels, wood paneling, and concrete masonry. This project would fully renovate the interior spaces, repair and refinish the existing exterior materials and provide new exterior signage for Station Pizzeria, and demolish and re-pave the parking lot with new striping, sidewalks, and an accessible building entrance. Page 495 of 1086 Existing Building 1,262 SF Existing green space New dense planting along North and West boundaries New dense planting along North and West boundaries (14) new stalls (3) new tandem stalls N e w a s p h a lt p a v in g Relocated curb cut Relocated curb cut V e rn o n A v e n u e Eden Prairie Road Existing path New perennial planting bed New perennial planting bed New 6' tall fence New 6' tall fence (5 ) n e w s t a lls 24' - 0"Existing foliage to remain Existing foliage to remain 13' - 5" 2 0 ' P a r k in g S e t b a c k 10' Parking Setback 25' Building SetbackBike Racks (20) Trash New Coolers + Dry Storage 423 SF Building Entry Line of building below roof overhang New City sidewalk 10' - 0" Employee Parking Delivery Driver Parking Behind Employees (2 ) n e w s ta lls Flush curb between ADA stall and access aisle This area to remain clear to serve as access aisle for ADA stall 8' - 0" 005Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Site Plan Parking: 17 (1 spot/100 sf) + 7 (1 spot for each employee at a major shift) + 0 (1 for each loading dock) =24 required 24 + 3 tandem = 27 stalls provided 3/32" = 1'-0" Site Context Plan - Revised Parking Page 496 of 1086 12' - 1"11' - 10"16' - 10"19' - 3 1/8"7' - 4 7/8"4' - 9 7/8" 7' - 6" 19' - 2"2' - 6"6' - 0" 12' - 1 1/8"5' - 2 7/8"8' - 10"Trash Enclosure Bike Rack Unisex Toilet Kitchen / Dining Unisex Toilet Party Room Mechanical Takeout Counter Coolers / Dry Storage Main Accessible Entry Dishwashing 11' - 11"10' - 0"35' - 6"Fixed Counter SeatingGarage Lobby Toilet Mechanical25' - 0"12' - 0" Existing concrete slab Existing concrete slab 006Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Floor Plans 0"2'-0" 4'-0"8'-0" 1/4" = 1'-0" Proposed Floor Plan 1/4" = 1'-0" Existing Floor Plan Page 497 of 1086 2 2 56 3 4 4 3 2 318' - 0"2 2 5 6 3 2 32 3 1 33 11' - 8"15' - 0"007Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Elevations 0" 8'-0"16'-0" 32'-0" EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATIONWEST ELEVATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 Painted CMU Painted Existing Metal Panel Painted Cementitious Panels Glass Panel Overhead Doors Black Storefront Black Painted Steel Page 498 of 1086 City Submittal Set 001Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 6016 Vernon Avenue South, Edina, MN Project Narrative This project is a proposed redevelopment of the property at 6016 Vernon Ave. S, which was previously Kevin Kee's automotive repair shop, into a Station Pizzeria restaurant with take-out, delivery, and limited dine-in services. The scope of the work would include a full interior renovation of the existing building, updating the building's exterior, and all new landscaping and paving. A concrete pad at the rear of the building will be extended to provide space for walk-in coolers and dry storage, as well as a trash enclosure. The proposed design will extensively beautify and screen the property from the surrounding single- family homes, while scrubbers on the exhaust hoods will also mitigate any aromas. Sufficient parking for both cars and bikes will be provided, to avoid any encroachment or congestion onto adjacent neighborhood streets. Creating a Station Pizzeria on this site would provide a valuable amenity and gathering space in a neighborhood that currently lacks walkable/bikeable dining options. Gross Building Area Phase Area Existing 1262 SF New 423 SF Total Area 1685 SF Parking Stall Type Count Accessible 1 Standard 20 Total Stalls 21 Proposed Hours of Operation: Sunday - Thursday: 11am - 9pm Friday - Saturday: 11am - 10pm Page 499 of 1086 PRD-3 PRD-3 R-2 PRD-2 R-1 R-1 Site Proposed PCD-1 Low Density Residential Site M e d iu m D e n s ity R e s id e n tia lProposed Neighborhood Commercial Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential L o w D e n s ity A tta c h e d R e s id e n tia l002Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Zoning Analysis Development Summary: Zoning District: Min. Front Yard Setback: Min. Side Yard Setback: Min. Rear Yard Setback: Max. Height: Max. F.A.R. Site Information Address: PID: Site Area: Existing Ord. PCD-4 35' 25' 25' 3 stories (36') 0.3 Proposed PCD-1 35' 25' 25' 3 stories (36') 1.0 6016 Vernon Ave S Edina, MN, 55436 3211721230027 16,373 SF (0.38 acres) Current Zoning PCD-4 Planned Commercial District The current zoning for the site at 6016 Vernon Ave. S is PCD-4, which allows the previous use of automobile service centers, as well as carwashes and gas stations. The proposed re-zoning to PCD-1 would retain the site as commercial zoning, but would allow a restaurant as a principal use for the site. Current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Medium-Density Residential In the Edina 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Future Land Use map shows this site as Medium Density Residential. As none of the other categories accurately describe this unique site, the project proposes creating a new category, Neighborhood Commercial, intended to denote small commercial uses directly serving the surrounding neighborhood. The site is adjacent to the Low Density Attached and Medium Density Residential areas in the neighborhood along Vernon Ave. It would serve these more concentrated populations as well as the surrounding Low Density Residential. Proposed Zoning PCD-1 Planned Commercial District Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Neighborhood Commercial Page 500 of 1086 003Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Site Context This site is located along Vernon Avenue, a main road in this part of Edina, among residential neighborhoods. By extending the sidewalk on Vernon Ave. along the site, it will create a more complete path for pedestrians from the immediate neighborhood to visit the pizzeria. Vernon Ave. also has a bike lane and the site is relatively close to Bredesen Park, which has many paths for walking and cycling. This proposal will include bike parking to make it convenient for cyclists to visit as well. Pedestrian Circulation Bike Lane Sidewalk Amenity Key Park Trail Future SidewalkSite Page 501 of 1086 004Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Existing Conditions Existing Building The existing building and parking lot have been vacant for multiple years and are accordingly in a state of disrepair. The existing exterior materials consist of metal panels, wood paneling, and concrete masonry. This project would fully renovate the interior spaces, repair and refinish the existing exterior materials and provide new exterior signage for Station Pizzeria, and demolish and re-pave the parking lot with new striping, sidewalks, and an accessible building entrance. Page 502 of 1086 Existing Building 1,262 SF Existing green space New dense planting along North and West boundaries New dense planting along North and West boundaries (13) new stalls (3) new stallsN e w a s p h a lt p a v in g Relocated curb cut Relocated curb cut V e rn o n A v e n u e Eden Prairie Road Existing path New perennial planting bed New perennial planting bed New 6' tall fence New 6' tall fence (5 ) n e w s t a lls 24' - 0"Existing foliage to remain Existing foliage to remain 13' - 5" 2 0 ' P a r k in g S e t b a c k 10' Parking Setback 25' Building SetbackBike Racks Trash New Coolers + Dry Storage 423 SF Building Entry Line of building below roof overhang New City sidewalk 10' - 0" 005Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Site Plan Parking: 17 (1 spot/100 sf) + 4 (1 spot for each employee at a major shift) + 0 (1 for each loading dock) =21 required, provided 3/32" = 1'-0" Site Context Plan Bike Racks Bike RacBike Racks Additional Bike Racks 3 Tandem Stalls for Employees / Drivers 1 Additional Parking Stall 2 Additional Parking Stalls Revised Parking Summary 21 Original Stalls Shown +3 Additional Parking Stalls +3 Tandem Employee / Driver Stalls 24 Standard Stalls 3 Tandem Stalls 27 Total Parking Stalls Bike Racks 10 Original Bike Spaces +10 Additional Bike Spaces 20 Total Bike Spaces Page 503 of 1086 12' - 1"11' - 10"16' - 10"19' - 3 1/8"7' - 4 7/8"4' - 9 7/8" 7' - 6" 19' - 2"2' - 6"6' - 0" 12' - 1 1/8"5' - 2 7/8"8' - 10"Trash Enclosure Bike Rack Unisex Toilet Kitchen / Dining Unisex Toilet Party Room Mechanical Takeout Counter Coolers / Dry Storage Main Accessible Entry Dishwashing 11' - 11"10' - 0"35' - 6"Garage Lobby Toilet Mechanical25' - 0"12' - 0" Existing concrete slab Existing concrete slab 006Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Floor Plans 0"2'-0" 4'-0"8'-0" 1/4" = 1'-0" Proposed Floor Plan 1/4" = 1'-0" Existing Floor Plan Page 504 of 1086 2 2 56 3 4 4 3 2 318' - 0"2 2 5 6 3 2 32 3 1 33 11' - 8"15' - 0"007Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Elevations 0"8'-0"16'-0" 32'-0" EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATIONWEST ELEVATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 Painted CMU Painted Existing Metal Panel Painted Cementitious Panels Glass Panel Overhead Doors Black Storefront Black Painted Steel Page 505 of 1086 Page 506 of 1086 COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C000 - COVR.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:24 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC000CIVIL COVER SHEETBJLBJLPRELIMINARY PLANSPROJECTLOCATIONSTATION PIZZERIAFOR SITE, GRADING, DRAINAGE, EROSIONCONTROL, UTILITIES, AND LANDSCAPING FORPROJECT CONTACTSBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTALNOTES:1. NOT ALL OF THE SHOWN ABBREVIATIONSARE UTILIZED WITHIN THIS CONSTRUCTIONPLAN SET.2. ALL SHOWN ABBREVIATIONS MAY BE WITHOR WITHOUT PERIODS.3. ADDITIONAL ABBREVIATIONS MAY BESHOWN ON THESE AND OTHER CIVIL SHEETS.BIT = BITUMINOUS ASPHALTBMP, BMPs, BMPS, BMP'S = BESTMANAGEMENT PRACTICESBOC = BACK OF CURBINGBTM = BOTTOMBW = BOTTOM OF (RETAINING) WALL (ATGROUND/FACE)C&G = CURB AND GUTTERC, COMM = COMMUNICATION (UTILITY LINE)C, CONC. = CONCRETECB# = STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN, INLET/INTAKE, ETC.CBMH# = STORM SEWER CATCH BASINMANHOLECD = CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS (PHASE)CIP = CAST-IN-PLACE (CONCRETE)CL, = CENTERLINECO# = SANITARY/STORM SEWER CLEANOUTCPP = CORRUGATED PLASTIC/POLYETHYLENEPIPEDD = DESIGN DEVELOPMENT (PHASE)DIA = DIAMETERDIP = DUCTILE IRON PIPEDT = DRAIN TILE (UTILITY LINE)DWY = DRIVEWAYE = ELECTRICAL (UTILITY LINE)EG = EXISTING GRADEELEV, EL = ELEVATIONENT = ENTRANCEEOF = EMERGENCY OVERFLOW (LOCATIONAND/OR ELEVATION)ESMT OR EASE = EASEMENTEX, EXIST. = EXISTINGFDC = FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFEMA = FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENTAGENCYFES = FLARED END SECTIONFFE = FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONFG = FINISHED GRADEFH, HYD = FIRE HYDRANTFM = FORCE MAINFO = FIBER OPTIC (UTILITY LINE)FUT. = FUTUREGAS = GAS LINE (UTILITY LINE)G = GUTTERGEN. = GENERATORGV = GATE VALVEHDPE = HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PIPEHP = HIGH POINTHWL = HIGH WATER LEVELIFC = ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONINV = INVERT/FLOWLINE OF FEATURELP = LOW POINTLS = LANDSCAPE/LANDSCAPINGMH#, STM# = STORM SEWER MANHOLEMATCH = MATCH (EXISTING)MEP = MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBINGMEP/T = MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING,TELECOMMUNICATIONSMH = MANHOLEMPCA = MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROLAGENCYMUTCD = MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFICCONTROL DEVICESN/A = NOT APPLICABLE, OR NOT CONSTRUCTEDNPDES = NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGEELIMINATION SYSTEMOH = OVERHEADOHP = OVERHEAD POWEROHT = OVERHEAD TELEPHONE/INTERNETOHTV = OVERHEAD TELEVISIONOCS# = OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTUREPDR = PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEWPE = POLYETHYLENE PIPEP.E. = PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERPL, = PROPERTY LINEPP = POWER POLEPR, PROP. = PROPOSEDPRELIM. = PRELIMINARYPVC = POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPERCP = REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPERIM = RIM OF STRUCTUREROW, R/W = RIGHT-OF-WAYSAN MH#, SSMH# = SANITARY SEWER MANHOLESBI = SOLUTION BLUE, INC. (PLAN, REPORT, ETC.CREATOR)SD = SCHEMATIC DESIGN (PHASE)SS, SAN = SANITARY SEWER OR SERVICESTA = ALIGNMENT STATIONSTM, ST = STORM SEWER OR SERVICESW, S/W = SIDEWALK/WALKSWMP = SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLANSWPPP = STORMWATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION PLANT, TEL = TELEPHONE (UTILITY LINE)TBD = TO BE DETERMINED (IN FUTURE PHASE)TC, T/C = TOP OF CURBINGTP = TOTAL PHOSPHORUSTRANS = TRANSFORMERTSS = TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDSTV = TELEVISION (UTILITY LINE)TW = TOP OF (RETAINING) WALLTYP. = TYPICALUG = UNDERGROUNDWM, WTR = WATERMAINZC = ZERO CURBUNITS/MEASUREMENTS:AC = ACREAF, AC. FT. = ACRE-FEETCF, CU. FT. = CUBIC FEETCFS = CUBIC FEET PER SECONDCY, CU. YDS. = CUBIC YARDSEA = EACHFT = FEETGPM = GALLONS PER MINUTEHR = HOURIN = INCH/INCHESLS, LBS. = POUNDSLF, LIN. FT. = LINEAR FEETMIN = MINUTESF, SQ. FT. = SQUARE FEETSY, SQ. YDS. = SQUARE YARDSABBREVIATIONS1.SAFETY NOTICE TO THE CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTEDCONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLEFOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURINGPERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND SHALL NOTBE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER, THE OWNER, AND/ORTHE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE ISNOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETYMEASURES IN, ON, AND/OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.2. THE DESIGN SHOWN IS BASED ON ENGINEER'S UNDERSTANDING OF EXISTING CONDITIONS BASEDUPON THE FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED BY ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING, CO ON SEPT. 9,2021. IF THE CONTRACTOR DOES NOT ACCEPT EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AS SHOWN ON THE PLANSWITHOUT EXCEPTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE MADE, AT OWN EXPENSE, A TOPOGRAPHICSURVEY BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR AND SUBMIT IT TO THE OWNER FOR REVIEW.3. THIS WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT EDITIONS OF THE "MnDOTSTANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION", THE "PROTECTING WATER QUALITYIN URBAN AREAS" (BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES) PREPARED BY THE MINNESOTA POLLUTIONCONTROL AGENCY (MPCA), THE APPLICABLE CITY'S/COUNTY'S SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENTPLAN (SWMP), AND THE LATEST CITY'S/COUNTY'S STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.3. ALL FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, CITY, WATERSHED, AND/OR OTHER PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINEDBY THE CONTRACTOR. ALL COSTS, FEES, ETC. OF SAID PERMITTING SHALL BE CONSIDEREDINCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT CONTRACT.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET AND MATCH EXISTING CONDITIONS; AND SHALL PROVIDETRANSITION(S) AS NECESSARY, REQUIRED, AND/OR DIRECTED.5. ALL MATERIALS SHALL MEET THE LATEST CITY'S/COUNTY'S SPECIFICATIONS. ALL CONSTRUCTIONSHALL MEET CITY'S/COUNTY'S SPECIFICATIONS, CURRENT EDITION.6. ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS OR DESIGNATEDSTAGING AREAS AND PROPERLY PROTECTED, STABILIZED, ETC.7. ALL CONTROL OF WATER AND EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BESEQUENCED, INSTALLED, AND MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR.8. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLPLANS OR STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANS (SWPPP) FOR THE PROJECT. SEE THERESPECTIVE PLAN(S), DETAILS, AND NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.9. ALL PUBLIC ROADWAYS, EXISTING BUILDINGS, AND/OR PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS INSIDE THECONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL REMAIN OPEN FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION..10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE OF TREES/SHRUBS NOT MARKED FORREMOVAL, INCLUDING MINIMIZING DISTURBANCE OF SOILS WITHIN THE TREES' DRIPLINE ZONES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STOCKPILE MATERIAL INSIDE THE TREE DRIPLINES.11. NO CONCRETE OR RUBBLE SHALL BE BACKFILLED ONSITE. BURNING OF DEBRIS ON SITE SHALLNOT BE ALLOWED.12. WETLANDS AREAS DESIGNATED TO BE PROTECTED SHALL BE AVOIDED. ANY WETLAND AREASDAMAGED BY SITE OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED AS REQUIRED BY THE JURISDICTIONALAGENCY.13. SHOWN LAYOUTS FOR ARCHITECTURAL, MEP/T, STRUCTURAL, LIGHTING, ETC. WERE CURRENT ATTHE TIME OF THE SUBMITTAL - THE CONTRACTOR(S) SHALL VERIFY ALL PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.14. SEE ALL OTHER CIVIL PLAN SHEETS FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES AND INFORMATION PRIOR TO THESTART OF CONSTRUCTION.15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION AND OTHER NOTES ON THEFOLLOWING SHEET(S) PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.16. WHETHER NOTED OR NOT, ALL NOTES ARE FOR THE CONTRACTOR(S), SUBCONTRACTOR(S), ETC.PERFORMING THEM.17. THE CONTRACTOR(S), SUBCONTRACTOR(S), ETC. SHALL REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES,MODIFICATIONS, ETC. IN THESE PLANS, THE NOTED REPORTS, ETC. IMMEDIATELY TO THE SIGNINGPROFESSIONAL(S) - WITH A WRITTEN FOLLOW UP, PHOTOGRAPHS, COURSE OF ACTION, ETC.FOLLOWING WITHIN FIVE (5) CALENDAR DAYS.18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THEIR MEANS AND METHODS TO REDUCE THE AREADISTURBED IN THE PUBLIC ROW.19. THE WATERSHED AGENCY FOR THIS PROJECT IS THE NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT(NMCWD).20. PROPERTY IRONS SHALL BE VERIFIED AND REPLACED PRIOR TO ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE(S) OFOCCUPANCY BY THE CITY/COUNTY.21. ENCROACHMENTS INTO COUNTY AND/OR STATE ROW ARE NOT ALLOWED UNLESS WRITTENAUTHORIZATION HAS BEEN GRANTED FROM SAID AGENCY.22.CONSTRUCTION IN RIGHT-OF-WAY: ALL WORK ON AT LEAST UTILITIES, CURBS, DRIVEWAYS,ALLEYS, AND SIDEWALKS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY MUST BE DONE TO CITY/COUNTYSTANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS BY A CONTRACTOR LICENSED AND INSURED TO WORK IN THECITY.GENERAL NOTESVICINITY MAPINDEX OF SHEETSARCHITECTCIVIL ENGINEERSURVEYORLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTMOMENTUM DESIGN GROUP BENJAMIN LUCAS, PE ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO. JOSEPH SCHEFFLER755 PRIOR AVE NORTHSOLUTION BLUE, INC. 17917 HIGWAY NO. 7PLAN-TYPE SITE PLANNINGSUITE 301A6110 BLUE CIRCLE DRIVE MINNETONKA, MN 55345& LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREST. PAUL, MN 55104SUITE 230TEL: 952-474-7964MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55408TEL: 952-583-9788MINNETONKA, MN 55343TEL: 737-900-1464TEL: 651-294-0038Sheet List TableSheet NumberSheet TitleRevision No. Revision DateC000CIVIL COVER SHEETC001GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATIONC002GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATIONC100EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALSC200EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILSC201EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILSC210EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PH IC211EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PH IIC300CIVIL SITE PLANC400GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC500UTILITIES PLANC900GENERAL DETAILSC901GENERAL DETAILSC902GENERAL DETAILSC950 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 1C951 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 2C952 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 3C953 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 4C954 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 5C955 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 6Page 507 of 1086 BENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-202454265COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C001 - NOTES.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC001GENERAL NOTES ANDINFORMATIONBJLBJLCONTINUED ONTHE NEXT PAGE6016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MN----THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE (OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER/INDEPENDENT SOILS ENGINEER). ALLSOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BERESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILSENGINEER.A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY:COMPANY: ADDRESS: PROJ. NO.:DATE:PHONE:XXX-XXX-XXXX (CONTACT)THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INDEPENDENTLY OBTAIN A COPY OF THIS REPORT.NO GROUNDWATER WAS ENCOUNTERED BY THE SOIL BORINGS.GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT1. DEMOLITION NOTES ARE NOT COMPREHENSIVE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION TO OBTAIN A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE INTENDED SCOPE OF WORK.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE LIMITS OF REMOVALS WITH PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSAND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING EXISTING SITE FEATURES (STRUCTURES, CURBS,WALKS, PAVEMENTS, UTILITIES, SIGNAGE, FENCES, TREES, ETC.) WHICH ARE TO REMAIN. REPAIROR REPLACE, TO OWNER'S SATISFACTION, ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING PROPERTY OR SITEFEATURES WHICH ARE TO REMAIN, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.3. COORDINATE DISRUPTION OF UTILITY SERVICES WITH THE OWNER'S PROJECT REPRESENTATIVEAND RESPECTIVE UTILITY OWNER(S), PUBLIC OR PRIVATE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDETEMPORARY UTILITIES AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN BUILDING SERVICES.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DISCONNECTION OF UTILITY SERVICE(S) TOEXISTING BUILDINGS PRIOR TO THE DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDING(S).5. THE CONTRACTOR MUST PROTECT THE PUBLIC AT ALL TIMES WITH FENCING, BARRICADES,ENCLOSURES, ETC. TO THE BEST PRACTICES.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE MEANS AND METHODS TO ENSURE ADJACENTPROPERTY IS NOT DAMAGED DURING ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.7. PRIOR TO START OF ANY WORK, ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PROTECTION MEASURESSHALL BE IN PLACE. SEE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN OR SWPPP SHEETS FOR LAYOUT,DETAILS, NOTES, ETC.8. PRIOR TO START OF ANY WORK, CLEARLY IDENTIFY AND LABEL EACH TREE THAT IS TO REMAINPRIOR TO STARTING ANY SITE CLEARING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT OWNER'S PROJECTREPRESENTATIVE FOR SITE INSPECTION AFTER ALL "TO REMAIN" TREES HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED.TREES THAT ARE TO BE PROTECTED SHALL HAVE TEMPORARY FENCING PLACED AT THE DRIP LINEAROUND EACH TREE.9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PRESERVE ALL VEGETATION NOT TO BE REMOVED BY CONSTRUCTION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RE-SEEDING OR SODDING AREAS DISTURBED BYCONSTRUCTION.10. DAMAGE TO DESIGNATED EXISTING TREES AND/OR VEGETATION SHALL BE MITIGATED DURINGCONSTRUCTION THROUGH PRUNING, ROOT PRUNING, FERTILIZING, AND WATERING.11. STOCKPILE TOPSOIL FOR REUSE ONSITE. VERIFY THE STRIPPED TOPSOIL MEETS THESPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED USE. VERIFY THE AMOUNT OF TOPSOIL NEEDED ANDLEGALLY REMOVE EXCESS FROM SITE.12. ALL MATERIAL REMOVED SHALL BE DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE AND IN A LEGAL MANNER.13. MATERIAL TO BE SALVAGED FOR REUSE BY THE OWNER SHALL BE REMOVED UNDAMAGED ANDIN AN USABLE CONDITION. TEMPORARY PROTECTED STORAGE ONSITE, OR ELSEWHERE, MAY BEREQUIRED.14. ONSITE BROKERAGE OF MATERIALS SALVAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR FROM MATERIALS TO BEREMOVED IS NOT PERMITTED WITHOUT PRIOR OWNER'S WRITTEN APPROVAL.15. LOCATION AND ELEVATIONS OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MET SHALL BE CONFIRMED BY THECONTRACTOR THROUGH FIELD EXPLORATIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTORSHALL REPORT TO THE ENGINEER ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THEIR MEASUREMENTS ANDTHESE PLANS IN WRITING.16. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE EXPLORATION EXCAVATIONS AND LOCATE EXISTINGUNDERGROUND UTILITIES SUFFICIENTLY AHEAD OF CONSTRUCTION TO PERMIT REVISIONS TOTHE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT TO THE ENGINEER ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEENTHEIR MEASUREMENTS AND THESE PLANS IN WRITING. IF REVISIONS ARE NECESSARY BECAUSEOF ACTUAL LOCATION OF EXISTING FACILITIES, THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKEPRECAUTIONARY MEASURES TO PROTECT THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN AND ANY OTHER EXISTINGLINES NOT OF RECORD OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS.17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT AND/OR MINIMIZE SAW-CUT AND PAVEMENT REMOVAL(S) TOONLY THOSE AREAS WHERE IT IS REQUIRED AS SHOWN ON THESE CONSTRUCTION PLANS. IF ANYDAMAGE IS INCURRED ON ANY OF THE SURROUNDING PAVEMENT, ETC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLBE RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS REMOVAL AND REPAIR AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.17.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THEIR MEANS AND METHODS TO REDUCE THE AREADISTURBED IN THE PUBLIC ROW.17.2. USE METHODS AND OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES THAT PREVENT SAW CUT SLURRY ANDPLANNING WASTE FROM LEAVING CITY AND/OR MNDOT RIGHT-OF-WAY AND FROMENTERING STORMWATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: INLETS,CURB FLOW LINES, DITCHES, AND CULVERTS.18. WHERE EXISTING PIPES ARE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE, THE EXPOSED PIPE ENDS SHALL BEBULKHEADED SHUT WITH A WATERTIGHT NON-SHRINK CONCRETE GROUT AT A THICKNESS OFNOT LESS THAN ONE (1) PIPE DIAMETER. REMAINING PIPE SHALL ALSO BE FILLED WITH FLOWABLEFILL.19. ABANDON OR REMOVE ALL SANITARY, WATER, AND/OR STORM SERVICES PER CITY/COUNTYSTANDARDS. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH THE CITY/COUNTY. REMOVE ALL SERVICES TO THEMAIN PER THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY'S STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS. ALL STREET RESTORATIONSHALL BE COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL STANDARDS.20. WHERE EXISTING MANHOLES TO BE ABANDONED SHALL HAVE THE PIPE LEADS PLUGGED FROMWITHIN THE MANHOLE WITH TWO (2) FEET OF WATERTIGHT NON-SHRINK CONCRETE GROUT.THE TOP SECTION SHALL BE REMOVED, THEN THE MANHOLE SHALL BE FILLED AND COMPACTEDWITH GRANULAR PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL OR FLOWABLE FILL. SEE DETAIL SHEETS.21. THE CONTRACTOR IS ADVISED TO DOCUMENT PRE-EXISTING CONDITION OF AT LEAST THE PUBLICRIGHT-OF0WAY PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.22. REMOVE AND REPAIR EXISTING AND PUBLIC SIDEWALK THAT IS HEAVED, CRACKED,DETERIORATED, HOLDING WATER, AND/OR ASPHALT PATCHED TO THE NEAREST JOINT LINE.23. ADJACENT STREETS, SIDEWALKS/TRAILS, AND/OR ALLEYS MUST BE SWEPT TO KEEP THEM FREE OFSEDIMENT, DEBRIS, ETC.24. THE CONTRACTOR MUST MONITOR CONDITIONS AND SWEEP AS NEEDED OR WITHIN 24 HOURSOF NOTICE BY THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA.GENERAL SITE DEMOLITION AND CLEARING NOTESGENERAL GEOMETRIC AND PAVING NOTES1. SITE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SET SHALL BE USED FOR ALL LAYOUT WORK. CHECK ALLPLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS. AT LEAST BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND PAVING SHALL BE LAIDOUT ONSITE BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.2. ALL PAVING DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2.1. THE FACE OF CURB IS ASSUMED TO BE EIGHT (8") INCHES FROM THE BACK OF CURB.2.2. ALL CURB AND GUTTER TO BE MnDOT B612 CURB AND GUTTER, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS ANDDIMENSIONS OF EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS, AND/OR EXACTBUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS.4. ALL SIDEWALKS SHALL HAVE POSITIVE SLOPE AWAY FROM THE BUILDING. THE MAXIMUM CROSSSLOPE SHALL BE TWO (2.0%) PERCENT AND THE MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPE SHALL BE FIVE(5.0%) PERCENT, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.5. FOR ALL PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS, SEE MnDOT STANDARD PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS.6. ALL CURB RADII SHALL BE FOUR (4') FEET AT THE BACK OF CURB, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7. DETECTABLE WARNING SHALL BE USED ON ALL ACCESSIBLE ROUTE RAMPS, SEE 'ACCESSIBILITYGRADING PLAN' SHEETS FOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE LOCATIONS AND THE 'ACCESSIBILITY DETAILS'.8. NO SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION SHALL EXCEED 2.08% (1:48) IN ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND/ORLOADING AREAS.9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH NEW AND EXISTING PAVEMENT SURFACES, SIDEWALKS,AND/OR CURBING AT SAWCUT LINES, WHILE NOT ALLOWING PONDING OF WATER AT ALL JOINTS.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SMOOTH GRADE TRANSITION ACROSS NEW AND EXISTINGJOINTS.10. ALLOW MINIMUM OF SEVEN (7) DAYS CURE FOR CURB AND GUTTER PRIOR TO PAVING.11. ALLOW MINIMUM OF 24 HOURS COOLING PRIOR TO ALLOWING ANY TRAFFIC ON BITUMINOUSPAVING.12. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR BITUMINOUS AND CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION DEPTHS ANDSPECIFICATIONS.12.1. ANY PATTERNED CONCRETE PAVING AND PATIO AREAS AS DEFINED BY SEPARATE HATCHINGSHALL MEET THE TEXTURE, COLOR, AND PATTERN REQUIREMENTS AS SHOWN ON THEARCHITECTURAL AND/OR LANDSCAPING PLANS.13. SIDEWALK GRADES MUST BE CARRIED ACROSS DRIVEWAYS AND/OR ALLEYS.14. REPLACE EXISTING AND PUBLIC SIDEWALK THAT IS HEAVED, CRACKED, DETERIORATED, HOLDINGWATER, AND/OR ASPHALT PATCHED TO THE NEAREST JOINT LINE.15. TYPICAL JOINT SPACING IN CONCRETE PAVEMENT SHALL BE THE FOLLOWING:15.1. AT NO TIME SHALL THE RESULTING CONCRETE PANEL EXCEED 225 SQUARE FEET.15.2. AT BOTH ENDS OF A RADIUS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.3. SIDEWALKS OR TRAILS: EQUAL TO CORRESPONDING WIDTH WITH EXPANSION JOINTS ATEACH CHANGE OF DIRECTION, ALONG BACK OF CURB, AND ALONG BUILDING FACADE,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.4. ROADWAYS OR STREETS: LANE LINES FOR LONGITUDINAL JOINTS; AND TYPICALLY EQUALLYAT 12 TO 15 FEET FOR TRANSVERSE JOINTS - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.5. DRIVEWAYS OR ENTRIES: CENTER AND/OR LANE LINES FOR LONGITUDINAL JOINTS; ANDTYPICALLY EQUALLY UP TO 15 FEET FOR TRANSVERSE JOINTS WITH EXPANSION JOINTS ATALONG BACK OF CURB AND ALONG BUILDING FACADE - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.6. PARKING LOT DRIVING AISLES: LANE LINES FOR LONGITUDINAL JOINTS; AND TYPICALLYEQUALLY AT 12 TO 15 FEET FOR TRANSVERSE JOINTS - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.7. PARKING LOT PARKING AREAS: MATCH DRIVE AISLE JOINTS; AND ACROSS THE MIDDLE OFTHE STALL PERPENDICULAR TO PARKING - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.8. PARKING LOT PARKING AREAS, HEAD-TO-HEAD: MATCH DRIVE AISLE JOINTS; ACROSS THEMIDDLE OF THE STALL PERPENDICULAR TO PARKING; AND ALONG THE PAVEMENT MARKINGBETWEEN THE HEAD-TO-HEAD STALLS - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.9. CURB AND GUTTER: TYPICAL TEN (10') FOOT SPACING WITH EXPANSION JOINTS AT EACHCHANGE OF DIRECTION AND/OR 60 FOOT MAXIMUM SPACINGS.15.10.EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION'S (MnDOT) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND/ORSTANDARD PLATES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.16. SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND/OR LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE AND FENCINGINFORMATION.17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ENTRY AND/OR PATIO LOCATIONS, SIZES, ETC. WITH AT LEASTTHE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR STOOPS, FOUNDATIONS, ADA ACCESS, ETC.18. TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, ENSURE NO SETTLING OF NEW AND EXISTING PAVEMENT SURFACES,SIDEWALKS, AND CURBS WILL OCCUR IN THE FUTURE.19. SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS BY OTHERS FOR SITE LIGHTING.SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES1. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MINNESOTA MUTCD, CURRENT VERSION.2. SEE THE REGULATORY SIGN DETAIL FOR SIGN AND POST DETAILS FOR SIGN DESIGNATION ANDSIZE INFORMATION.3. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGNS SHALL BE PER MINNESOTA MUTCD, CURRENT VERSION, SEEACCESSIBLE SIGN AND POST DETAIL(S).4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FOUR (4") INCH WIDE SOLID YELLOW LATEX AND/OR EPOXYPAINT STRIPING IN ALL PAVED PARKING AREAS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SAME MATERIAL, WIDTH, STYLE/PATTERN, AND COLORSTRIPING IN ALL PAVED ROADWAY AREAS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND/OR SYMBOLS AT ACCESSIBLEPARKING SPACES PER MINNESOTA MUTCD, ADA, AND LOCAL CODES.7. ANY PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND/OR SYMBOLS THAT EXISTED PRIOR TO THE START OF THEPROJECT SHALL BE REPLACED IN-KIND.7.1. IF IT IS LATEX AND/OR EPOXY PAINT, ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PAVEMENT MARKINGREPLACEMENT SHALL BE BORNE BY THE CONTRACTOR.GENERAL ACCESSIBILITY NOTES1. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE ALL ADA ROUTES ARE COMPLIANT WITH ADA AND MINNESOTASTATE ACCESSIBILITY CODE REGULATIONS AND IS TO NOTIFY ENGINEER, IN WRITING, IF FIELDCONDITIONS PROHIBIT COMPLIANCE.3. ALL GRADIENT ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINALSLOPE OF FIVE (5%) PERCENT (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS WHERE A MAXIMUMLONGITUDINAL SLOPE OF 8.33% (1:12) IS ALLOWED, AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08%(1:48).3.1. THE MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL AND ACCESS AISLESHALL BE UP TO 2.08% (1:48).3.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADAROUTE(S) PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT.3.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER, IN WRITING, IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS ADISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THE DESIGN GRADIENT.COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PAVING THE CONTRACTOR.3.4.ANY PAVING SLOPES SHOWN ON THE 'GRADING PLANS' ARE AT THAT SPECIFIC LOCATION,AND DOES NOT REFLECT THE TRUE SLOPE EVEN ONE (1") INCH AWAY.4. ALL TURNING LOCATIONS AND/OR LANDING PADS SHOWN SHOULD PROVIDE AT MAXIMUMSLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48) IN ALL DIRECTIONS AND IN A MINIMUM FOUR (4') FOOT BY FOUR (4')FOOT AREA.5. SEE MNDOT STANDARD PLANS FOR TRUNCATED DOME DETAILS AND NOTES.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ENTRY AND/OR PATIO LOCATIONS, SIZES, ETC. WITH AT LEASTTHE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR STOOPS, FOUNDATIONS, ADA ACCESS, ETC.1. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IN PLACE BEFORE BEGINNINGSITE GRADING ACTIVITIES.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETING AND SUBMITTING THE APPLICATIONFOR THE MPCA GENERAL STORMWATER PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WHENCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR THE PROJECT DISTURBS GREATER THAN ONE (1) ACRE.2.1. ALL THE CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH STORMWATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SWPPP AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA'SNATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM GENERAL PERMIT (NPDES PERMIT)AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE CONTENTS.2.2. THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN OR SWPPP AND ALL OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS MUST BEKEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING QUANTITIES OF CUT, FILL, AND/ORWASTE MATERIAL TO BE HANDLED (E.G., STRIPPED, REMOVED, REPLACED, ETC.) AND FOR THEAMOUNT OF GRADING TO BE DONE DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE(S) OF THIS PROJECT.3.1. ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPORTING SUITABLE MATERIAL AND EXPORTINGUNSUITABLE/EXCESS/WASTE MATERIAL SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE BID PRICE.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TOADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE(S) OF THIS PROJECT. THECONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENTPROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE(S) OF THIS PROJECT.5. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL SHALL BE PERFORMED ON THESTREET AND PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEMAXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTIONOF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILSENGINEER. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE ALL SUBGRADE SOIL DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTIONTHAT HAVE BECOME UNSUITABLE AND/OR WILL NOT PASS A TEST ROLL. LEGALLY REMOVEUNSUITABLE SOIL FROM THE SITE AND IMPORT SUITABLE SOIL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THEOWNER.7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STRIP, STOCKPILE, AND RE-SPREAD EXISTING ONSITE TOPSOIL, IFMATERIAL IS APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND/OR THE SPECIFICATIONS. PROVIDE AUNIFORM THICKNESS OF SIX (6") INCHES MINIMUM IN ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BELANDSCAPED.8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LEGALLY DISPOSE OF ANY EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL, UNLESS OTHERWISEDIRECTED.9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN TEMPORARY PROTECTION MEASURES DURING ALLCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. SEE SITE REMOVALS PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. PROVIDEADDITIONAL PROTECTION AS NECESSARY AS WORK PROGRESSES.10. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE.11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AT ALL TIMES.12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT "GUTTER OUT" WHEREWATER DRAINS AWAY FROM CURB. ALL OTHER AREAS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS "GUTTER IN"CURB.13. NO GRADED SLOPES SHALL EXCEED 3:1 (HORIZONTAL TO VERTICAL), UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.14. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF GRADING ANDPROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITH UNIFORM SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHEREELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES.15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT THE DISTURBED AREA AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND CONDUCTGRADING OPERATIONS IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION.16. SOIL SURFACES COMPACTED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND REMAINING PERVIOUS UPONCOMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION MUST BE DECOMPACTED. IN ADDITION, TREE ROOTS ANDOTHER EXISTING VEGETATION MUST BE PROTECTED UNTIL FINAL FINAL REVEGETATION OROTHER STABILIZATION OF THE SITE IS ACCEPTED.17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ENTRY AND/OR PATIO LOCATIONS, SIZES, ELEVATIONS, ETC.WITH AT LEAST THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR STOOPS, FOUNDATIONS, ADA ACCESS, ETC.18. SEE EROSION CONTROL PLAN OR SWPPP SHEETS FOR BMP CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND NOTES.19. SEE CIVIL SITE AND/OR LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PERMANENT TURF RESTORATION AND PLANTINGINFORMATION.20. THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE VARIOUS CONDUIT WITH AT LEAST A SINGLE PULL-STRING(MINIMUM 300 POUND TENSION) FOR NOTED UTILITY SERVICE LINES IN AT LEAST THE "GENERALUTILITY NOTES". SEE THE MEP/T PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL SITE UTILITY INFORMATION.GENERAL GRADING NOTESPage 508 of 1086 BENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-202454265COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C001 - NOTES.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC002GENERAL NOTES ANDINFORMATIONBJLBJL1. THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS CONCERNING TYPE ANDLOCATION OF UTILITIES HAS BEEN DESIGNATED UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL 'C'. THESE QUALITY LEVELSWERE DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-02. ENTITLED "STANDARDGUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA".2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING/PROPOSED UTILITY MAINS ANDSERVICES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE LOCATED UTILITIES ANDTHE EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN(S) SHOULD BE NOTED AND FORWARDED TO THE ENGINEER INWRITING.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE MEANS AND METHODS TO ENSURE ADJACENTPROPERTY IS NOT DAMAGED DURING UTILITY INSTALLATION(S).4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL COORDINATION WITH UTILITY PROVIDER(S)FOR THE REMOVAL AND/OR RELOCATION OF THE RESPECTIVE EXISTING UTILITIES AFFECTED BYTHE SITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING PORTIONS OF WORK WHICH MAY BE PERFORMED BY THERESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANY'S OWN FORCES.5. ALL UTILITY CONSTRUCTION TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS AND/ORSPECIFICATIONS OF THE STATE, CITY ENGINEER'S ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), AND THECITY.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OF THE LOCAL GOVERNINGAUTHORITIES (LGAs) FOR CONNECTION TO AT LEAST PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ANDSTORM SEWER UTILITIES AND WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW), INCLUDINGPROVIDING A WRITTEN AND APPROVED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AS NECESSARY.7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR UTILITY CONNECTIONS ANDUTILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY/COUNTY. THE CITY/COUNTY SHALL BENOTIFIED 48-HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH THE UTILITY CONSTRUCTION OR ANYREQUIRED TESTING.7.1. ALL PERMITS, APPLICATIONS, FEES AND CHARGES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THECONTRACTOR AND ARE INCIDENTAL TO THE CONTRACT, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OPERATE, INTERFERE WITH, CONNECT ANY PIPE OR HOSE TO,AND/OR TAP ANY WATERMAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY/COUNTY UNLESS DULY AUTHORIZED TODO SO BY THE CITY/COUNTY IN WRITING. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF SCHEDULED ORUNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE TO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THECONTRACTOR AND AT HIS/HER EXPENSE.9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED CATCH BASINS, INLETS/INTAKES,AND/OR MANHOLES TO BE FLUSH WITH THE FINAL GRADE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9.1. COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY OWNER(S).9.2. ANY UTILITY STRUCTURES BEING RESET IN PAVED AREAS SHALL MEET THE RESPECTIVEUTILITY OWNER'S REQUIREMENTS AT LEAST FOR TRAFFIC LOADING.10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN ALL SURFACE FLOW CHANNELS, PIPES, AND STRUCTURES AFTERFINAL SURFACES ARE ESTABLISHED AND PRIOR TO PROJECT CLOSEOUT.11. ALL WATER AND SEWER CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH CITY/COUNTY ENGINEERINGDESIGN STANDARDS, LATEST EDITION.12. SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE PVC, SDR 35, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.1. SANITARY SERVICES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF EIGHT (8.0') FEET OF COVER OVER THE TOPOF PIPE, WITHOUT ADEQUATE PIPE INSULATION INSTALLED.12.2. SANITARY SERVICE CONNECTIONS TO THE BUILDING(S) SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665.12.3. SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUTS SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.4. SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE CONNECTED TO A WYE ON THE MAIN AND SHALL NOT BECONSTRUCTED INTO MANHOLES UNLESS APPROVED BY THE CITY/COUNTY IN WRITING.APPROVED CONNECTIONS TO A MANHOLE REQUIRE A KOR-N-SEAL CONNECTION, ORAPPROVED EQUAL, AND MUST MATCH THE MANHOLE INVERT.12.5. PIPE LENGTHS ARE MEASURED FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURE TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13. WATERMAIN PIPE SHALL BE PVC, C900 (DUCTILE IRON - CLASS 52), UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13.1. ALL WATER MAIN AND SERVICES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF EIGHT (8.0') FEET OF COVEROVER THE TOP OF WATERMAIN, WITHOUT HAVING ADEQUATE PIPE INSULATION INSTALLED.13.2. ALL WATERMAINS SHALL BE INSTALLED TO MEET MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH(MnDoH) REGULATIONS.13.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THRUST BLOCKING AND MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINTSON ALL WATERMAIN JOINTS PER THE CITY'S/COUNTY'S STANDARDS.13.4. ALL WATER VALVES AND VALVE BOXES, CURB/CORPORATION STOPS AND STANDPIPE, ETC.SHALL BE DUCTILE IRON, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13.5. PIPE LENGTHS ARE MEASURED BETWEEN FITTINGS, BENDS, VALVES, ETC., UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED.13.6. A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18-INCHES AND A MINIMUM HORIZONTALSEPARATION OF TEN (10') FEET BETWEEN OUTSIDE PIPE DIAMETERS IS REQUIRED AT ALLWATERMAIN AND A SEWER MAIN (BUILDING, STORM, AND SANITARY) CROSSINGS.12. STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) SHALL BE DUAL WALL ANDCONFORM TO AASHTO M294 AND TO MNDOT SPECIFICATION 3278. PIPES 3" TO 10" IN DIAMETERMJST COMPLY WITH AASHTO M252, PIPES 12" TO 60" IN DIAMETER MUST COMPLY WITH AASHTOM294. ALL FITTINGS MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM STANDARD D3212 AND MNDOT SPECIFICATION327812.1. ROOF DRAIN LEADERS SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.2. STORM SEWER CLEANOUTS SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.3. PIPE LENGTHS ARE MEASURED FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURE TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.4. PIPE LENGTHS AT FLARED END SECTIONS (FES) ARE MEASURED FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURETO TOP OPENING OF THE FES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.5. ENVIRONMENTAL MANHOLES (MINIMUM THREE (3') FOOT SUMPS) SHALL BE CONSTRUCTEDAS THE LAST STRUCTURE THAT IS ROAD ACCESSIBLE PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO ANY WATERBODY. ADDITIONAL PROTECTION MAY BE REQUIRED WHEN OUTLETTING TO A SENSITIVEWATER BODY.13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ACCESS TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION (FDC),AND/OR A PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY STANDPIPE, FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONAL AT ALLTIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.14. ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS SHALL BE COORDINATED AND/OR PERMITTED WITH THECITY/COUNTY. FIELD VERIFY UTILITY MAIN LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS, SIZES, ETC.15. UTILITY SERVICE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE BUILDING(S) ARE SHOWN CORRECTLY AS OF THE DATEOF THIS CIVIL PLAN SET.15.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL UTILITY SERVICE LOCATIONS BY COMPARING THIS CIVILPLAN SET WITH AT LEAST THE MEP/T PLANS PRIOR TO ANY UTILITY CONSTRUCTION.16. SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND MEP/T PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL UTILITY LOCATIONS ANDINFORMATION.17. SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS BY OTHERS FOR SITE LIGHTING, IF NOT SHOWN ON THE CIVIL SHEETS.18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH AT LEAST THE ELECTRICAL AND/ORCOMMUNICATIONS CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE PROPERLY SIZED CONDUITS FOR AT LEAST SITELIGHTING AND/OR UTILITY SERVICES. SEE THE MEP/T PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL SITE UTILITYINFORMATION.19. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION WITH UTILITY PROVIDERSAND/OR OWNERS FOR REMOVAL AND/OR RELOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AFFECTED BY SITEIMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING PORTIONS OF WORK WHICH MAY BE PERFORMED BY UTILITYCOMPANY'S OWN FORCES. ALL PERMITS, APPLICATIONS, FEES, AND CHARGES ARE THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.GENERAL UTILITY NOTES6016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MN----Page 509 of 1086 LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXS 88°51'01" E207.86L=50.05R=946.71N 02°03'51" E127.49 290.08N 64 °47 '26 " E1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4566810TYP.4223355579PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C100 - EC & REM.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC100EXISTING CONDITIONS &REMOVALSBJLCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)BJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542651. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE'GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. PROTECT AND MAINTAIN ANY EXISTING FEATURES NOT SHOWN FORREMOVAL, RELOCATION, SALVAGE, ETC.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THEIR MEANS AND METHODS TOREDUCE THE AREA DISTURBED IN THE PUBLIC ROW.4. TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE THE AREASOF DISTURBANCE TO THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT AREA(S).5. REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE FEATURES (E.G., PAVEMENT, SIDEWALK,CURB AND GUTTER, ETC.) TO NEAREST JOINT LINE WITH FULL-DEPTHSAWCUTS.6. REMOVE AND REPAIR EXISTING AND PUBLIC SIDEWALK THAT IS HEAVED,CRACKED, DETERIORATED, HOLDING WATER, AND/OR ASPHALT PATCHEDTO THE NEAREST JOINT LINE.NOTESEXISTING ZONING: PCD-4 PLANNED COMMERCIALPARCEL/LOT: TRACT C, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 194, FILES OF THEREGISTRAR OF TITLES, EXCEPT THAT PART OF SAID TRACT EMBRACED WITHINREGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1081, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTATOTAL LOT AREA16,584 SQ. FT.EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA(S): (AS SURVEYED AND ON PARCEL/LOT)BUILDING(S)1,270 SQ. FT.DRIVEWAY, ETC.10,369 SQ. FT.SIDEWALK, ETC.845 SQ. FT.TOTAL 12,484 SQ. FT.IMPERVIOUS = 75.3% OF PARCEL/LOTNOTE(S):1. REMAINING AREA IS PERVIOUS (GRASSED W/ SOME TREES).SITE DATA6016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL802800|800.00COPROPERTY LINEBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSANITARY SEWERWATERMAINDRAINTILEGAS LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRICUNDERGROUND ELECTRICTELEPHONESWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPSIGN & BOLLARDLIGHT POLEADA PAVEMENT MARKINGPARKING STALL COUNT11. COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL PLAN REMOVALS FOR BUILDINGRENOVATIONS2. REMOVE BITUMINOUS3. REMOVE CONCRETE4. REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK5. REMOVE CURB & GUTTER6. REMOVE WOOD FENCE7. REMOVE PLANTER BOX AND CURBING8. REMOVE TREE9. PROTECT POWER POLE10. PROTECT TREEKEYNOTESEXISTINGREMOVALSLEGENDCURB AND GUTTER REMOVALFENCE REMOVALUTILITY REMOVALSAWCUTBUILDING REMOVALPAVEMENT REMOVALCONCRETE SIDEWALK REMOVALCONCRETE REMOVALEXISTING FEATURE REMOVALTREE PROTECTION~~~~~~~~~~~~~SBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 510 of 1086 PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C200 - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC200EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL DETAILSBJLCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL RADIUS = 1 FOOTPER INCH OFTRUNK DIAMETER48"18" MIN. POSTEMBEDMENTEROS 01: 4/221TREE PROTECTION FENCENOT TO SCALE42" ORANGE FENCEDRIP LINEEXISTING GRADEFENCE LOCATION ATLIMITS OF CRITICALROOT ZONEDRIP LINESTUDDED STEEL"T" POST6' MIN LENGTHMAX 8' SPACING6"6"APPROVED GEOTEXTILEFABRIC (36" WIDTH)LAY FABRIC IN TRENCH30" MIN.LENGTH 24" MIN.DEPTHNOTES:1. POST SPACING SHALL NOT EXCEED 6 FEET2. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SHALL BE "MIRAFI" TYPE OR APPROVED EQUAL3. TRENCH SHALL BE A MIN. OF 6 INCHES DEEP BY 6 INCHES WIDE4. MACHINE SLICED METHOD IS ACCEPTABLE2" SQUARE SHARPENED WOODPOST @ 6' MAX. SPACING ORMEET CITY REQUIREMENTSBACKFILL OVER THE TOP OFFABRIC & COMPACT THESOIL OR MACHINE SLICE8"-12" DEEP (PLUS 6" FLAP)EROS 02: 4/222SILT FENCE - STANDARD MACHINE SLICEDNOT TO SCALEFABRIC SECURELYFASTENED TO POSTGRADEEROS 06 (ALT): 4/223CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE - AGES MUD MATNOT TO SCALEC200C200C2001. CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA NOTES, STANDARD PLATES, AND/OR DETAILS SHALL CONTROL OVER OTHERNOTES, PLATES, AND/OR DETAILS.2.(NAME OF INDIVIDUAL) IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CLEANLINESS OF THE SITE AND THEMAINTENANCE OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS AND CAN BE REACHED AT(TELEPHONE NUMBER).3. THE STREET WILL BE SWEPT CLEAN BEFORE THE END OF EACH DAY OF ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION, WHENSEDIMENT IS TRACKED INTO THE STREET.4. AREAS WITH SLOPES GREATER THAN 3 TO 1 AND AREAS NEXT TO WETLANDS/WATERBODIES GRADED OREXPOSED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH TEMPORARY VEGETATION, MULCHING,OR OTHER MEANS AS SOON AS PRACTICAL AND DOUBLE SILT FENCE.5. ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WILL BE STABILIZED AS SOON AS PRACTICAL. UNWORKED SOILS THAT REMAINEXPOSED AND NOT IN USE FOR LONGER THAN 14 DAYS WILL BE COVERED WITH TEMPORARY SEED(GRASS, OATS, OR WHEAT).6. NO CONCRETE WASHOUT SHALL OCCUR ON SITE UNLESS IT IS DONE WITH AN APPROVED MINNESOTAPOLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) DEVICE OR STANDARD.7. ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE SURROUNDED WITH ADEQUATE PERIMETER CONTROL TO PREVENTSEDIMENTATION AND EROSION.8. FROM MARCH 21ST TO NOVEMBER 1ST, DROP INLET PROTECTION WITH CURB OVERFLOW INSTALLED INALL STORM SEWER INLETS DOWNSTREAM OF THE SITE WITHIN ONE (1) BLOCK OR AS DIRECTED BY THECITY.9. THE SITE SHALL BE KEPT CLEAN AT ALL TIMES AND REFUSE PROPERLY CONTROLLED.10. TEMPORARY PUMPING SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED WITHOUT THE USE OF AN APPROVED MINNESOTAPOLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) DEVICE OR STANDARD.11. SOIL COMPACTION SHALL BE MINIMIZED; AREAS OF COMPACTED SOIL WILL BE REMOVED OR LOOSENEDVIA TILLING TO A DEPTH OF NO LESS THAN FOUR (4”) INCHES.12. DUST CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE TAKEN.13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT ON A WEEKLY BASIS AND AFTER ANY RAINFALL GREATER THAN ONE(1”) INCH ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES AND MAKE ANY REPAIRS IMMEDIATELY. ANINSPECTION LOG SHALL BE KEPT ONSITE DETAILING THESE INSPECTIONS AND REPAIRS PERFORMED.SITE WINTERIZATION AND SPRING REINSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS:1. BY NOVEMBER 1ST1.1. REMOVE ALL INLET PROTECTION.1.2. STABILIZE EXPOSED SOILS, INCLUDING UNWORKED GROUND AND STOCKPILES, WITHDISC-ANCHORED STRAW BLANKET. TO AVOID STABILIZING STOCKPILES, EXCAVATED MATERIALSMAY BE HAULED OFF-SITE.1.3. INSTALL OR REPAIR PERIMETER CONTROL.1.4. REMOVE DEBRIS, DUMPSTERS, AND PORTABLE RESTROOM FROM PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (WIDTHVARIES) TO AVOID INTERFERENCE WITH SNOW PLOWING OPERATIONS.1.5. REPAIR DAMAGED SIDEWALK PANELS (CONCRETE OR TEMPORARY ASPHALT).2. BY MARCH 21ST2.1. REINSTALL INLET PROTECTION. PROVIDE NUMBER AND LOCATION OF INLET PROTECTION.2.2. INSTALL OR REPAIR PERIMETER CONTROL.GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES:BEFORE DEMOLITION AND GRADING BEGINS:1. INSTALL SILT FENCE/BIO ROLL AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE CONSTRUCTION AREA.2. SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES MUST REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL FINAL STABILIZATION HAS BEENESTABLISHED AND THEN SHALL BE REMOVED. SEDIMENT CONTROLS MAY BE REMOVED TOACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY BUT MUST BE REPLACED BEFORE THE NEXTRAIN.3. A TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AT EACH ACCESS POINT TO THESITE AND A SIX (6”) INCH LAYER OF ONE (1”) TO TWO (2”) INCH ROCK EXTENDING AT LEAST 50 FEETFROM THE STREET INTO THE SITE AND SHALL BE UNDERLAIN WITH PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC. THEENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED DURING CONSTRUCTION BY TOP DRESSING OR WASHING TO PREVENTTRACKING OR FLOW OF SEDIMENTS ONTO PUBLIC STREETS, WALKS OR ALLEYS. POTENTIAL ENTRANCESTHAT ARE NOT SO PROTECTED SHALL BE CLOSED BY FENCING TO PREVENT UNPROTECTED EXIT FROMTHE SITE.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL INLET PROTECTION ON ALL EXISTING STORM SEWER INLETS INACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY STANDARD DETAILS. INLET PROTECTION SHALL ALSO BE PROVIDED ON ALLPROPOSED STORM SEWER INLETS IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF THE INLET. INLETPROTECTION MUST BE INSTALLED IN A MANNER THAT WILL NOT IMPOUND WATER FOR EXTENDEDPERIODS OF TIME OR IN A MANNER THAT PRESENTS A HAZARD TO VEHICULAR OR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.DURING CONSTRUCTION:1. WHEN DIRT STOCKPILES HAVE BEEN CREATED, A DOUBLE ROW OF SILT FENCE SHALL BE PLACED TOPREVENT ESCAPE OF SEDIMENT LADEN RUNOFF AND IF THE PILES OR OTHER DISTURBED AREAS ARE TOREMAIN IN PLACE FOR MORE THAN 14 DAYS, THEY SHALL BE SEEDED WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENTOF TRANSPORTATION SEED MIXTURE 22-111 AT 100 POUNDS PER ACRE FOLLOWED BY COVERING WITHSPRAY MULCH.2. A DUMPSTER SHALL BE PLACED ON THE SITE FOR PROMPT DISPOSAL OF ANY CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS.THESE DUMPSTERS SHALL BE SERVICED REGULARLY TO PREVENT OVERFLOWING AND BLOWING ONTOADJACENT PROPERTIES. DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTES FROM THE SITE SHALL IN ACCORDANCE WITHMINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) REQUIREMENTS.3. A SEPARATE CONTAINER SHALL BE PLACED FOR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE. HAZARDOUS WASTESSHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH MPCA REQUIREMENTS.4. THE CONCRETE TRUCK WASHOUT SHALL BE IN THE PLASTIC LINED DITCH AND DISPOSE OF WASHINGS ASSOLID WASTE.5. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND AFTER MAJORRAINFALL EVENTS AND SHALL BE CLEANED AND REPAIRED AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE DOWNSTREAMPROTECTION.6. ALL STREETS AND OTHER PUBLIC WAYS SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY AND IF LITTER OR SOILS HAS BEENDEPOSITED IT SHALL PROMPTLY BE REMOVED.7. IF NECESSARY, VEHICLES, THAT HAVE MUD ON THEIR WHEELS, SHALL BE CLEANED BEFORE EXITING THESITE IN THE ROCK ENTRANCE AREAS8. MOISTURE SHALL BE APPLIED TO DISTURBED AREAS TO CONTROL DUST AS NEEDED.9. PORTABLE TOILET FACILITIES SHALL BE PLACED ON SITE FOR USE BY WORKERS, SHALL BE TIED DOWN,AND SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED.10. IF IT BECOMES NECESSARY TO PUMP THE EXCAVATION DURING CONSTRUCTION, PUMP DISCHARGESHALL BE INTO THE STOCKPILE AREAS SO THAT THE DOUBLE SILT FENCE AROUND THESE AREAS CANFILTER THE WATER BEFORE IT LEAVES THE SITE.11. TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SHALL BE INSTALLED NO LATER THAN 14 DAYS AFTER THE SITE IS FIRSTDISTURBED AND SHALL CONSIST OF BROADCAST SEEDING WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION SEED MIXTURE 22-111 AT 100 POUNDS PER ACRE FOLLOWED BY COVERING WITHSPRAY MULCH.12. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN ON THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLPLANS ARE THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TEMPORARY EARTH DIKES,SEDIMENT TRAPS OR BASINS, AND ADDITIONAL SILT FENCING AS DEEMED NECESSARY TO CONTROLEROSION.SITE WORK COMPLETION:1. WHEN FINAL GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED BUT BEFORE PLACEMENT OF SEED OR SOD AN “AS-BUILT”SURVEY SHALL BE DONE PER CITY OF EDINA REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE THAT GRADING WAS PROPERLYDONE.2. WHEN ANY REMEDIAL GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED, SOD OR SEEDING SHALL BE COMPLETEDINCLUDING ANY EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS FOR STEEP AREAS.3. WHEN TURF IS ESTABLISHED, SILT FENCE, INLET PROTECTION, AND OTHER EROSION AND SEDIMENTCONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AND ADJACENT STREETS, ALLEYS, AND WALKS SHALL BECLEANED AS NEEDED TO DELIVER A SITE THAT IS EROSION RESISTANT AND CLEAN.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN POSITIVE DRAINAGE OF A MINIMUM TWO (2%) PERCENT SLOPEAWAY FROM PROPOSED BUILDING - MINIMUM FOUR (4%) PERCENT PREFERRED.CITY OF EDINA EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES10 MIL PLASTIC(MIN)SQUARE BAILS OROTHER APPROVEDMATERIALSWOODEN STAKESPROVIDE MIN. 4"FREEBOARDEXISTINGGROUNDORROADWAYLENGTH & WIDTHSIMILAR TO BELOWGRADE OPTIONCLEAN OUT AT80% CAPACITYASTREETGUTTER1' DEEP MIN.EXISTINGGROUNDBARRIERFENCE1' FREEBOARDFIBER ROLLBACK OF CURBBACK OFCURBBARRIER FENCE(DOES NOT NEEDTO BE SILT FENCE)FIBER ROLLS (MAX4' SPACING FORSTAKES)CLEANOUT AT80%CAPACITYMAX 4' DEEPEROS 31: 4/224C200CONCRETE WASHOUTNOT TO SCALE15' TYP.8' - 10' TYP.2' FEETDEEPMIN.BELOW GRADESECTION A-ABELOW GRADESECTION A-AABOVE GRADEAPage 511 of 1086 PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C200 - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC201EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL DETAILSBJLCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1C201C201EROS 08: 4/222SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGNOT TO SCALESTRAW OR WOOD FIBER6" ROLL OF ENCLOSED INPLASTIC OR POLYESTERNETTINGENDS SECURELY CLOSEDTO PREVENT LOSS OF FILLSECURED WITH ZIP TIE2'' X 2'' X 18'' LONG WOODEN STAKESAT 2'-0'' SPACING. DRIVE THROUGHNETTING AND FIBER ROLL.TEMPORARY BARRIER OF SILT FENCE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT-LADEN WATERFROM ENTERING THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION.1.0' MIN.EROS 16: 4/22INLET PROTECTION - SILT FENCENOT TO SCALEHEAVY DUTYSILT FENCE (TYP)ANCHOR WITH 2"X2"STAKES DRIVEN INTOTHE GROUNDSTORM SEWERSTRUCTUREHEAVY DUTYSILT FENCE (TYP)2"X2" STAKE (TYP)LCROADWAY1 0 "MI N . 3'3'NOTE:STAPLING OR STAKING OF BLANKET TO BE IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS.EROS 07: 4/223C201EROSION CONTROL BLANKETNOT TO SCALECATEGORY ACCEPTABLE TYPES1STRAW RD 1S, WOOD FIBER RD 1S2STRAW 1S, WOOD FIBER 1S3STRAW 2S, WOOD FIBER 2S4STRAW/COCONUT 2S, WOOD FIBER HV 2SCATEGORY SLOPE VELOCITY1FLAT-2 3:1 < 5.0 FPS3 3:1 < 6.5 FPS4 2:1 < 7.0 FPSTHE LETTERING DESIGNATION SHALL BE DEFINED AS FOLLOWS:1S - NETTING ON ONE SIDERD - RAPIDLY DEGRADABLE2S - NETTING ON TWO SIDESHV - HIGH VELOCITYEROSION CONTROL BLANKET INSTALLATION ON AN INSLOPE( WHEN REQUIRED )SILT FENCE ORBALE CHECK ASSPECIFIEDSLOPE 3:1 AND STEEPERWOOD FIBERBLANKET MULCHEND OF UPPER BLANKETTO OVERLAP BOTTOMEND OF BLANKET BURIED IN6'' DEEP VERTICAL TRENCHSAFETY SLOPE - STANDARDSEED & MULCHVA R I E S ( T R AN S I T IONAR EA ) ( F LA T A R EA )NOTES:1. 1 18" X 1 18" X 30" WOODEN STAKES ARE RECOMMENDEDFOR 6", 9", AND 12" SEDIMENT LOGS.2. 1 18" X 1 18" X 48" WOODEN STAKES ARE RECOMMENDEDFOR 20" SEDIMENT LOGS.ANCHOR THROUGHNETTING BEHINDBACK OF CURBANCHOR THROUGHNETTING BEHINDBACK OF CURBSEDIMENT LOGANCHORED THROUGH NETTINGBEHIND BACK OF CURB( TR AN S I T ION AR E A ) VA R I E S V AR I E S EROS 27: 4/224C201INLET PROTECTION - CURB CUTNOT TO SCALEPage 512 of 1086 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDSFSFSFSFSF SFSFSFSFSFSILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL 2/C200)ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL 3/C200)SILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL 2/C200)ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL 3/C200)TREE PROTECTION FENCE(SEE DETAIL 1/C200), TYP.INLET PROTECTION - SILTFENCE RING (SEE DETAIL1/C201)COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C200 - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC210EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLAN - PH IBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE'GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ONSHEET C200 PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.3. SEE 'EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALS' FOR TREE PROTECTIONLOCATION(S).4. EROSION CONTROL MATERIAL QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONALPURPOSES ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FORTHEMSELVES THE EXACT QUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT RELY ON THESE QUANTITIES FOR THEIRBID. THE CIVIL ENGINEER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COST ESTIMATESAND/OR ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS.NOTESITEMUNITQUANTITYROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT EA2SILT FENCELF 140TREE PROTECTION FENCEEA5INLET PROTECTION - RINGEA 1EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS QUANTITIES - PHASE 1802800PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERDRAINTILESWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPGUTTER OUT CURBDIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOWSILT FENCEFILTER LOGROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITINLET PROTECTIONTREE PROTECTION FENCELoDPROPOSEDLEGEND802800EXISTINGSF800.00800.00SBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 513 of 1086 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD3 513925.50925.67TC 926.21G 925.71G 925.73G 925.90TC 926.55G 926.05926.34HP 926.79LP 926.48926.52926.50926.51TC 927.80G 927.30G 927.33G 927.33TC 927.83G 927.33927.33927.33G 927.21G 927.14TC 927.59G 927.09926.98926.95 926.81926.9292 6 . 7 8TC 927.00G 926.50G 926.35G 926.19TC 926.71G 926.21926.30926.40926.51926.91926.82926.29926.84926.81927.31927.20927.18HP 927.13TC 926.87G 926.37G 926.24926.65927.39H P 9 2 7 . 9 7925.83927.90928.08927.87927.68927.58926.10927.09TC 926.90G 926.40G 926.02G 925.85TC 926.56G 926.06G 926.08926.17926.66925.95926.48TC 926.37G 925.87925.89927.90927.90927.90927.90 927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.72927.72925.00926 927926 926 92 792892 8 9 2 7 928927 927 927927927927 92 8 927 TC 927.75G 927.25TC 927.27G 926.77G 926.77G 926.77TC 927.28G 926.78927.72927.66LP 926.76-6.1%1.3%-8.4%1.3% -7 .7%1.2% - 8 . 4% 1. 2% -1.5%-8.0%-8.0%-1.9%-1.2%-2.0%-1.9%SILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL 2/C200)ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL 3/C200)SILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL 2/C200)ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL 3/C200)TREE PROTECTION FENCE(SEE DETAIL 1/C200), TYP.SFSFSFSFSFSFSFSF SFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFCONCRETE WASHOUT(SEE DETAIL 4/C200)BIO ROLL PERIMETER CONTROLAROUND RAIN GARDEN BMP (SEEDETAIL 5/C200). CAN BE REMOVEDONCE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGEAREA HAS BEEN STABILIZED (TYP.)INLET PROTECTION - SILT FENCERING (SEE DETAIL 1/C201)INLET PROTECTION - CURBCUT (SEE DETAIL 4/C201)INLET PROTECTION - CURBCUT (SEE DETAIL 4/C201)INLET PROTECTION - SILT FENCERING (SEE DETAIL 1/C201)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C200 - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC211EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLAN - PH IIBJLCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)BJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTALSBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEITEMUNITQUANTITYROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT EA NO ADDITIONALSILT FENCELF 230 ADDITIONALTREE PROTECTION FENCEEA NO ADDITIONALINLET PROTECTION - RINGEA 1 ADDITIONALINLET PROTECTION - CURB CUT EA2BIO-LOGLF 120EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SF 565EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS QUANTITIES - PHASE 2802800PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERDRAINTILESWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPGUTTER OUT CURBDIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOWSILT FENCEFILTER LOGROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETINLET PROTECTIONTREE PROTECTION FENCELoDPROPOSEDLEGEND802800EXISTINGSF800.00800.00LOT AREA16,584 SQ. FT.DISTURBED AREA19,120 SQ. FT.PAVEMENT AREA9,793 SQ. FT.BUILDING AREA1,684 SQ. FT.SEEDING AREA5,096 SQ. FT.PRE-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS12,482 SQ. FT.POST-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS11,477 SQ. FT.AREA SUMMARY1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE'GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ONSHEET C200 PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.3. SEE 'EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALS' FOR TREE PROTECTIONLOCATION(S).4. EROSION CONTROL MATERIAL QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONALPURPOSES ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FORTHEMSELVES THE EXACT QUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT RELY ON THESE QUANTITIES FOR THEIRBID. THE CIVIL ENGINEER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COST ESTIMATESAND/OR ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS.NOTESPage 514 of 1086 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD3 5132REPAIR PAVEMENT DISTURBANCE1112REPAIR PAVEMENT DISTURBANCE33444566777788888899992299101010101010101010101010101011B6-18, VERIFY11B6-18, VERIFYTIE INTO EXISTINGCURB & GUTTERTIE INTO EXISTINGCURB & GUTTERTIE INTO EXISTINGCURB & GUTTERTIE INTO EXISTINGCURB & GUTTER121314141414141415TYP.15TYP.15TYP.161617171818181818192021CFACING NORTHCFACING NORTHADFACING NORTHBFACING SOUTHBFACING SOUTHCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C300 - SITE.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC300CIVIL SITE PLANBJLBJL11. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT - NORMAL DUTY (SEE DETAIL 1/C900)2. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT - MATCH IN KIND3. CONCRETE SIDEWALK (SEE DETAIL 2/C900)4. CONCRETE SIDEWALK (SEE DETAIL 420/C901)5. CONCRETE PATIO (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)6. CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON (SEE DETAIL 410/C901)7. CONCRETE STOOP (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)8. B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (SEE DETAIL 8/C900)9. FLUSH CONCRETE CURB (SEE DETAIL 4/C901)10. TRANSITION FROM FLUSH CONCRETE CURB TO 6" CURB (SEEGRADING PLAN AND DETAIL 1/C901)11. CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER - MATCH EXISTING12. CURB CUT WITH RIP RAP (SEE DETAIL 2/C901)13. ACCESSIBLE STALL STRIPING (SEE DETAIL 7/C901)14. ACCESSIBLE RAMP (SEE MNDOT DETAIL SHEETS C950-C955)15. 4" HIGH VISIBILITY SOLID WHITE PAINT (SEE GENERAL NOTES ONSHEET C001)16. 4" POLY PREFORMED PERMANENT PAVEMENT MARKINGS (SEEDETAIL 3/C901)17. 6' TALL CEDAR FENCE (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)18. LANDSCAPE AREA (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS)19. RAIN GARDEN (SEE GRADING PLAN)20. TRASH ENCLOSURE WITH DUMPSTER (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)21. BICYCLE RACK (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)22. RAIN GUARDIAN TURRET (SEE UTILITY PLAN)KEYNOTESBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE "GENERAL NOTES ANDINFORMATION" SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.2. NO NEW, RELOCATED, AND/OR REPLACEMENT SIGNAGE SHALL BEINSTALLED IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW).3. THE SHOWN SEEDING AREAS SHALL BE LOOSENED TO A MINIMUMDEPTH OF EIGHT (8") INCHES AND SOIL AMENDMENTS ADDED TO MEETMINNESOTA STATE STORMWATER MANUAL PREDEVELOPMENT SOILTYPE BULK DENSITIES.NOTESPROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGCURB & GUTTERSOIL BORINGSFENCESIGNLIGHT POLEPARKING STALL COUNTADA PAVEMENT MARKING2" BITUMINOUS MILL/OVERLAYSTANDARD DUTY BITUMINOUSCONCRETE SIDEWALKCONCRETE PAVINGLoDPROPOSEDLEGENDEXISTINGZONING: PCD-1 PLANNED COMMERCIALLOT AREA: 16,584 SQ. FT.EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA:12,482 SQ. FT.PROPOSED NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA:11,477 SQ. FT.NET IMPERVIOUS CREATED:-1,005 SQ. FT. (8.1% DECREASE) BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA:1,684 SQ. FT.BUILDING HEIGHT PROPOSED:SEE ARCH. PLANSDISTURBED AREA:19,120 SQ. FT.EXISTING IMPERVIOUS DISTURBED:12,482 SQ. FT. (100% DISTURBED)PROPOSED PARKING SPACES:9' X 18.5'20 SPACESADA 1 SPACEPROVIDED: 21 SPACESBUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS:FRONT YARD SETBACK (SOUTH)20 FEETSIDE YARD SETBACK (EAST & WEST) 20 FEETREAR YARD SETBACK (NORTH)20 FEETPARKING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS:FRONT YARD SETBACK (SOUTH))20 FEETSIDE YARD SETBACK (EAST & WEST) 10 FEETREAR YARD SETBACK (NORTH)10 FEETAA. HANDICAP PARKING - R7-8M (12" X 18")B. DO NOT ENTER - R5-1 (30" X 30")C. WRONG WAY - R5-1a (30" X 18")D. STOP SIGN - R1-1 (30" X 30")SIGN SCHEDULE (PER MN MUTCD)SITE DATAXXSBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 515 of 1086 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD3 513925.50925.67TC 926.21G 925.71G 925.73G 925.90TC 926.55G 926.05926.34HP 926.79LP 926.48926.52926.50926.51TC 927.80G 927.30G 927.33G 927.33TC 927.83G 927.33927.33927.33G 927.21G 927.14TC 927.59G 927.09926.98926.95 926.81926.9292 6 . 7 8TC 927.00G 926.50G 926.35G 926.19TC 926.71G 926.21926.30926.40926.51926.91926.82926.29926.84926.81927.31927.20927.18HP 927.13TC 926.87G 926.37G 926.24926.65927.39H P 9 2 7 . 9 7925.83927.90928.08927.87927.68927.58926.10927.09TC 926.90G 926.40G 926.02G 925.85TC 926.56G 926.06G 926.08926.17926.66925.95926.48TC 926.37G 925.87925.89927.90927.90927.90927.90 927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.72927.72925.00926 927926 926 92 792892 8 9 2 7 928927 927 927927927927 92 8 927 TC 927.75G 927.25TC 927.27G 926.77G 926.77G 926.77TC 927.28G 926.78927.72927.66LP 926.76-6.1%1.3%-8.4%1.3% -7 .7%1.2% - 8 . 4% 1. 2% -1.5%-8.0%-8.0%-1.9%-1.2%-2.0%-1.9%25 FT TRANSISTION1R1EOF926.35 11123 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION21 FT TRANSISTION21 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION26 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION26 FT TRANSISTION26 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION26 FT TRANSISTION21 FT TRANSISTION34END4START4END4START4START4ENDCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C400 - GRAD.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC400GRADING & DRAINAGEPLANBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE 'GENERALNOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHEDSURFACE GRADE.PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERDRAINTILESWALESOIL BORINGSDRAINAGE SLOPEEMERGENCY OVERFLOWFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPGUTTER OUT CURBSPOT ELEVATIONTOP OF CURBGUTTERZERO CURBMATCH EXISTINGCONCRETEPROPOSEDLEGENDEXISTING1.0%EOF802800LoD802800800.00800.00BMPNO.TOPELEV.BOTTOMELEV.WEIR (EOF)OUTLETELEV.ELEV. LENGTH BREADTH1 926.52 925.00 926.35 3 FT 10 FT 926.20INSTALL PER THE DETAIL ON C900RAIN GARDENSR11. ONE WAY DIRECTIONAL PEDESTRIAN RAMP. SEE DETAILSFROM MNDOT STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250.2. TRANSITION FROM FLUSH CURB TO 6" CURB, SEE SHEETC900 FOR DETAIL.3. PERPENDICULAR PEDESTRIAN RAMP. SEE DETAILS FROMMNDOT STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250.4. GUTTER OUT CURB (SEE DETAIL 5/C901)KEYNOTESNOTESTC 800.00G 800.00ZC 800.00MA 800.00±C 800.00800.00SBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 516 of 1086 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDRAIN GARDEN, SEE SHEET C400RAIN GUARDIAN TURRETRIM=926.48OUTLET=925.48SEE DETAIL SHEET C902CURB CUT WITH RIP RAPLOW POINT=926.76SLOPE SWALE TOWARDSEXISTING STORMSTRUCTURE IN ROWMH 01RIM=926.20INV=923.92 (8" HDPE)INV=923.92 (6" DRAINTILE)SEE DETAIL 1/C9021 4 2 L F - 8 " HDP E @ 0 . 5 0%MH 02RIM=926.92INV=923.21SEE DETAIL 2/C90256 LF - 8" HDPE @ 0.50%CONNECT TO EXCATCH BASININV=922.956" PERF DRAINTILE, SLOPE TOWARDS MH 01COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C500 - UTIL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC500UTILITIES PLANBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE 'GENERALNOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. EXISTING SERVICES WILL REMAIN IN PLACE EXTERIOR TO BUILDING.REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL & MECHANICAL PLANS FOR INTERIORIMPROVEMENTS TO SANITARY AND WATER SERVICES.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY UTILITY LOCATIONS AND SIZES WITHARCHITECTURAL AND MEP/T PLANS PRIOR TO ORDERING MATERIAL.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RIM, AND/OR EOF ELEVATIONS WITHTHE GRADING PLANS.5. BUILDING SHALL CONTAIN SPRINKLERS ON EACH FLOOR.6. SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND/OR MEP/T PLANS TO VERIFY THE LOCATIONSOF UTILITY CONNECTIONS, UTILITY METERS, DOWNSPOUTS, AND/ORBUILDING LIGHTING.NOTES||COCOPROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSANITARY SEWERWATERMAINDRAINTILEGAS LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRICALUNDERGROUND ELECTRICALTELEPHONESWALESOIL BORINGSLIGHT POLEPROPOSEDLEGENDEXISTINGLoDSBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 517 of 1086 COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C900 - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:27 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC900GENERAL DETAILSBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTALSITE 01: 4/221C900TYPICAL BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTIONSNOT TO SCALEFINISHED GRADE2" BIT. WEARING COURSE TYPESPWEB340B PER MNDOT SPEC. 2360TACK COAT, MNDOT SPEC. 23572" BIT. BASE COURSE TYPESPNWB330B PER MNDOT SPEC. 23608" AGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE PER MNDOT3138, COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 100%STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITYAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED TO AMINIMUM OF 95% STANDARD PROCTORMAXIMUM DENSITYNORMAL DUTYNOTES:1. REFER TO MnDOT SPECIFICATION 2521 FOR SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION.2. SIDEWALKS TO HAVE 2% MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.3. CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 5' SPACING, EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 60' OR LESS.2"SITE 06: 4/222TYPICAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTIONNOT TO SCALEFINISHED GRADE4" PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE (P.C.C.)FOR CONCRETE SIDEWALK SLABS WIDER THAN 6',PROVIDE 6 X 6 - W1.4 X W1.4 WELDED WIRE FABRIC4" AGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE (100%CRUSHED) BASE PER MNDOT 3138, COMPACTEDPER SPECIFICATIONSAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED PERSPECIFICATIONS4"CONCRETESIDEWALK4" AGGREGATEBASE CL V6"6"6"12"2% SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDING (TYP.)PAVEMENTSITE 10: 4/223SIDEWALK SECTION WITH INTEGRAL CURBNOT TO SCALEEXPANSION JOINTC9001' MIN.EDGE MILLBITUMINOUSWEAR COURSEBITUMINOUSBASE COURSEAGGREGATE BASEEXISTINGPROPOSEDROUTE & SEAL JOINTPER SPECIFICATIONSTACK COAT,MnDOT SPEC. 23571' MIN.OVERLAP ATSEAMSTACK COAT,MnDOT SPEC. 2357SITE 43: 4/224BITUMINOUS PAVING TRANSITIONNOT TO SCALEPROPOSED TO EXISTINGBITUMINOUSWEAR COURSEBITUMINOUSBASE COURSEAGGREGATE BASEPROPOSED AT SEAMSREQUIREDVEHICLE IDPARKINGFOR VIOLATIONUP TO $200 FINENOTES:1. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN SHALL CONFORM WITH ALL CURRENT STATEAND LOCAL CODES AND REGULATIONSSIGN SHALL BE CENTERED ATTHE HEAD OF THE PARKINGSPACE AND PLACED AMAXIMUM 8 FEET FROM THEHEAD OF THE PARKING SPACE3/8" STEEL PLATE AT TOP,SLOPE DOWN, WELD ALL SIDESINTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OFACCESSIBILITY PER ICC/ANSIA117.1, SECTION 703.6.3.1METAL SIGN WITH LETTERING PERICC/ANSI A117.1, SECTION 703.WHITE LEGEND AND BORDER ONBLUE BACKGROUND, FULLYREFLECTORIZED.TS 4" X 4" X .375" STEEL TUBE, FILLWITH CONCRETE AND PAINTWHERE CONCRETE OCCURS ATBASE, USE 1-1/2" EXPANSIONMATERIAL AND URETHANE CAULK10:1 SLOPE4" LONG STUDS WELD ATQUARTER POINTS 8" ONCENTERCONCRETE BASE (3,000 PSI)12" MIN2"18" MIN.60" - 66"2'-6"15"FINISHED GRADEVANACCESSIBLEATTACH 6" X 12" VAN ACCESSIBLESIGN TO POST IF APPLICABLE. SEEPLAN FOR LOCATIONS4'-0" MIN.6"ADA 05: 4/226ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND STEEL POSTNOT TO SCALENO PARKINGCURB RAMP OR FLUSH RIBBONCURB WITH WARNING PANELS(SEE PLAN AND DETAILS)4" WIDESTRIPE (TYP.)ACCESS AISLE SHALL EXTEND THE FULL LENGTH OF THEPARKING SPACE IT SERVESVARIESSEE PLANSACCESS AISLE8' MIN.PARKING STALL8' MIN.CENTER - CENTERADA 11: 4/227ACCESSIBILITY PARKING PAVEMENT MARKINGSNOT TO SCALENO PARKINGMARKINGINTERNATIONALSYMBOL OFACCESSIBILITYMARKING118NOTES:1. DO NOT ALLOW CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC OR COMPACT SOIL WITHIN BASINS2. RAIN GARDEN AREA MAY ONLY BE EXCAVATED TO ITS BASE AFTER THE CONTRIBUTINGWATERSHED IS STABLE3. THE FINAL GRADING OF THE RAIN GARDEN SHOULD FOLLOW THIS DETAIL WITHUNDULATIONS IN THE BOTTOM OF THE BMP. IT SHOULD NOT BE GRADED FLAT. THIS WILLINCREASE THE CHANCES OF ADEQUATE VEGETATION TAKING HOLD IN WET CONDITIONS.4. PROVIDE 12" NATIVE SOIL LOOSENING AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER3:1 MAX.CROSS SECTIONPLANTING MEDIUM - FILTER MEDIA MIX C85-88% SEMI-COARSE WASHED SAND PER ASTM C-338-12% FINES BY VOLUME3-5% MNDOT GRADE 2 COMPOST (SPEC 3890)6" MAX UNCOMPACTED LIFTS SHREDDED HARDWOODMULCH AND PLANTINGSSEE LANDSCAPESCARIFY NATIVE SOIL TODEPTH OF 12"TYPE 1 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC,PER MNDOT 373312" MIN.GRAD 10: 4/225RAIN GARDEN CROSS SECTIONNOT TO SCALETOP/EDGE OFRAIN GARDENC900C900C900C900C900C900PAVEMENT SECTION VARIESAGG. BASEVARIES31MIN. OF 4"AGG. BASEUNDER CURB1/4 " LIPMINIMUM 6" BEHINDBACK OF CURB"A" "L"CURBTYPE12" 20"B61218"B618 26"B624 24" 32"13.5"6"A8"LSITE 16: 4/22B6 STYLE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTERNOT TO SCALESLOPE GUTTER (3/4" PER FT. TYP.) TIPGUTTER OUT AS REQUIRED PER PLAN3" RADIUS3" RADIUS1/2"RADIUSPERFORATED PVC DRAINTILE. SEEPLAN FOR SIZE, INVERT AND LAYOUT.Page 518 of 1086 COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C900 - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:27 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC901GENERAL DETAILSBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1C90123C901C901NOTE:1. FULL VERTICAL HEIGHT OF CURB IS ASSUMED TO BE 6INCHES AT BEGINNING OF CURB TAPER AND 0 INCHESAT END OF TAPER UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.SEE PLANS FORTAPER LENGTHSITE 37: 4/22CURB TAPERNOT TO SCALECONCRETE CURB & GUTTER(FULL HEIGHT)PERSPECTIVEBITUMINOUSPAVEMENT TAPERWIDTHVARIESNOTE:FILTER BLANKET WITH GEOTEXTILEFABRIC REQUIRED UNDER RIP RAP.A6"SITE 39: 4/22CURB CUT WITH RIP-RAP SWALENOT TO SCALEPERSPECTIVEGEOTEXTILE FABRICFILTER BLANKETRIPRAPSECTION A-AFLOWCONCRETECURB & GUTTERRIP-RAP SWALE WITHGEOTEXTILE BLANKETPER PLANSEE PLANS FORTAPER LENGTHCONCRETECURB & GUTTERACENTER LINE OFTRAFFIC LANE TYP.3'-8"5'-0"9'-5"1'-4"1'-0"2'-8"6'-7"1'-0"5'-0"1'-11"8'-0"1'-0"8'-0"4'-0"4'-0"SEE SITE PLANSITE 46: 4/22TRAFFIC ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSNOT TO SCALEWHITE REFLECTIVETRAFFIC PAINT, TYP.PAVEMENT SECTION VARIESAGG. BASEVARIESVARIES8"MIN OF 4"AGG. BASEUNDER CURBMIN 4"8"6"6"SITE 21: 4/224C901ROLLED CURBNOT TO SCALE3" RADIUS"A"CURBTYPE12"B61218"B618B624 24"3" R1/2" R1/2" R313" R1/2" R1/2" R31SITE 17: 4/225C901B6 STYLE CURB INFALL-OUTFALLNOT TO SCALEOUTFALL CURB & GUTTER6"6"SLOPE3/4"/FT6"SLOPE3/4"/FT6"13-1/2"13-1/2"8"A7"7"8"AINFALL CURB & GUTTERPage 519 of 1086 COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C900 - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:27 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC902GENERAL DETAILSBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL CASTING AS SPECIFICED2" ADJUSTING RINGS(MIN 2, MAX 4)MANHOLE STEPS, NEENAH R1981J OREQUAL, 16" ON CENTER AS APPROVED BYOSHA.NOTES:1. NO BLOCK STRUCTURES ARE ALLOWED.2. MANHOLE SHALL BE PRECAST IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-478, MnDOT 2506.GROUT BOTTOM OF MANHOLE TO 12DIAMETER AT PIPE AND SLOPE GROUT 2"TOWARD THE INVERT.MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE PLACED SOTHAT OFFSET VERTICAL PORTION OF CONEAND STEPS ARE FACING DOWNSTREAM.PIPE SHALL BE CUT OUT FLUSH WITH INSIDEFACE OF WALL.ALL DOG HOUSES SHALL BE GROUTED ONINSIDE AND OUTSIDE.BASE SLAB SHALL BE PRECAST INACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-478,MnDOT 2506.SLOPE 2"PER FT.STM 01: 4/222C902STANDARD MANHOLENOT TO SCALEPLAN27"27"MAX4'VARIES12" - 16"VARIES 4'6"SECTIONALL JOINTS IN MANHOLE TO HAVE "O" RINGRUBBER GASKETS, OR APPROVED EQUAL5"NOTES:1. NO WOOD SHALL BE USED FOR ADJUSTING CASTING: CEMENT MORTAR ONLY.2. MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE CAST IRON, ALUMINUM OR STEEL REINFORCED PLASTICPER ASTM C478. LOCATION SHALL BE AS NOTED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS.3. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE BASE SLAB & COVER SLAB PER ASTM C478.4. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS WITH O-RING GASKETS &LUBRICANT EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.5. FILL OPENING BETWEEN PIPE AND MANHOLE WALL WITH CEMENT MORTAR.6. INSIDE SURFACE SHALL BE FINISHED SMOOTH.7. LIFTING HOLES WHICH PENETRATE THROUGH SECTION WALLS ARE NOT PERMITTED.24" ADJUSTMENT RINGSPERMITTED, 5 RINGS MAX.·FULL 38" BED OF MORTARBETWEEN RINGS & PLASTEREXTERIOR ONLY WITH 4" MIN.THICK COAT·STRIKE OFF INTERIOR·NO SHIMS PERMITTEDPRECAST REINFORCEDCONCRETE BARRELSTRUCTUREBASE SLAB SHALL BE PRECAST INACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-478,MnDOT 2506SAWCUTTING REQUIRED FORPARTIAL PIPE LENGTHSINVERT FILLET CAST INPLACE MnDOT TYPE3Y44 CONCRETESTM 07: 4/221C902SURFACE DRAINNOT TO SCALEPRECAST BASEMANHOLEDIAMETERSLABTHICKNESS48"6"54" - 102" 8"108" 10"120"12"DITCH GRATE, STOOLTYPE NEENAH R4342Page 520 of 1086 C950Page 521 of 1086 C951Page 522 of 1086 C952Page 523 of 1086 C953Page 524 of 1086 C954Page 525 of 1086 C955Page 526 of 1086 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXS 88°51'01" E207.86L=50.05R=946.71N 02°03'51" E127.49 290.08N 64 °47 '26 " E 926 925 926 927926926 927 927927927 927 927927 927 927 927 927SOD4" MULCHSODSODEXISTING SITE TREE TO REMAINPLUG RAIN GARDEN, SEE PLANTSCHEDULE FOR QUANTY & SPACINGEXISTING STREET TREE TO REMAINEXISTING STREET TREE TO REMAIN4" MULCH & EDGING4" MULCH & EDGING4" MULCH4" MULCH4" MULCH & EDGINGSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSODSODSODPH (4)SS (2)CS (2)SS (2)CS (3)SF (3)CS (2)BH (6)SE (16)PP (5)PD (13)AF (8)BW (3)FO (3)EV (6)CH (1)LP (3)ER (1)ER (1)LB (6)AF (5)LB (7)BH (9)AF (3)LB (7)LB (5)CH (1)RS (3)SE (6)RS (3)RAIN GARDEN NOTES: NATIVE PLANTS, PLANTING AND TRANSPLANTING·NATIVE PLANTING NOT TO BEGIN UNTIL PLANTING AREAS HAVE BEEN AMENDED AND PREPARED.·PLANTING BEDS TO BE FREE FROM ALL WEEDS AND INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES.·PLANT MATERIAL TO BE SPACED 18" O.C.·ALL PLANT MATERIAL TO BE THOROUGHLY WATERED UPON INSTALLATION.WCWHITE CONEFLOWEREchinacea purpurea albaPLUG36LBLITTLE BLUE STEMSchizachyrium scopariumPLUG36PBPRAIRIE BLAZINGSTARLiatris ligulistylisPLUG36PCPURPLE CONEFLOWEREchinacea purpureaPLUG36PDPRAIRIE DROPSEEDSporobolus heterolepsisPLUG36NANEW ENGLAND ASTERAster novae-angliaePLUG36JBJOHNSON'S BLUE GERANIUMGeranium x 'Johnson's Blue'PLUG36EBELIJAH BLUE FESCUEFestuca ovina 'Elijah Blue'PLUG36SGSHENANDOAH SWITCH GRASSPanicum virgatum 'Shenandoah'PLUG36DECIDUOUS TREESCH2.5" CAL. B&B 50'H x 50'WCOMMON HACKBERRYCeltis occidentalisLANDSCAPE PLANT LEGENDORNAMENTAL TREESPP1.5" CAL. B&B 40'H x 7'WPARKLAND PILLAR BIRCHBetula platyphylla 'Jefpark'EVERGREEN TREESSSB&B 25'H x 10'WSWISS STONE ALGONQUIN PILLARPinus cembra 'Algonquin Pillar'SFPOT12'H x 8'WKOREAN SILVER SHOW FIRAbies koreana 'Silver Show'4' HT#10 CONT.2563LPB&B 25'H x 12'WLIMBER NORTHERN BLUE PINEPinus flexillis 'Northern Blue'4' HT3PH2" CAL. B&B 35'H x 25'WPRAIRIE HORIZON ALDERAlnus hirsuta 'Harbin'4CSPOT8'H x 6'WCOLORADO SESTER'S DWARFPicea pungens 'Sester Dwarf'#10 CONT.5SOD - --- SYEDGING - --- LFMULCH - --- CYSHRUBSNV#5 CONT. POT 20'H x 10'W6NANNYBERRY VIBURNUMViburnum lentagoID#5 CONT. POT 5'H x 7'W8ISANTI DOGWOODCornus sericea 'Isanti'AFPOT 4'H x 4'W16ARCTIC FIRE DOGWOODCornus stolonifera 'Farrow'SEPOT 1.5'H x 2'W22AUTUMN FIRESedum x 'Autumn Fire'LB#1 CONT. POT 3'H x 2'W25STANDING OVATION LITTLE BLUE STEMSchizachyrium scoparium 'Standing Ovation'ORNAMENTAL GRASSESPERENNIALS#2 CONT.#1 CONT.PD#1 CONT. POT 3'H x 3'W13PRAIRIE DROPSEEDSporobolus heterolepisBH#2 CONT. POT 3'H x 3'W15DWARF BUSH HONEYSUCKLEDiervilla loniceraFOPOT 5'H x 5'W3FIBER OPTICS BUTTONBUSHCephalanthus occidentalis 'Bailoptics'#2 CONT.BWPOT 5'H x 5'W3DWARF BLUE LEAF ARCTIC WILLOWSalix purpurea 'Nana'#2 CONT.EVPOT 2'H X 2'W6DWARF EUROPEAN VIBURNUMViburnum opulus 'Nanum'#2 CONT.ERB&B 20'H x 20'WEASTERN REDBUDCercis canadensis2" CAL.2RSPOT 4'H x 3'W6RUSSIAN SAGESalvia yangii#1 CONT.-- SYKENTUCKY BLUE GRASS MIX. SEE SPECS FOR MULCHINGINFORMATION.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT IAM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPEARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.SIGNATURE:____________________JOSEPH L. SCHEFFLERPROJECT NUMBERPROJECT NAMESHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEDate:License #:PLAN-Type SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Minneapolis, MN info@plan-type.com5559706-30-2026DRAWN BYPROJECT MANAGERLOUIEJ + LSTATIONPIZZERIA6016 VERNON AVE,EDINA, MNXXXXISSUE LOGExpiration:09-13-202409-13-2024SUBMITTALNOT FORCONSTRUCT IONLANDSCAPE NOTES:·CONTRACTOR TO HAVE ALL UTILITIES ON SITE VERIFIED AND MARKED BEFORE STARTING WORK.··CONTRACTOR IS LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING UTILITIES ON SITE ANDRESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH REPAIRING/REPLACING DAMAGE.·CONTRACTOR IS LIABLE FOR ALL DAMAGE RELATED TO CONTRACTORS ACTIVITY ON SITE ANDRESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH REPAIRING/REPLACING DAMAGE.·OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR PLANTING IN ALL RIGHT-OF-WAY.·COMPLETE WORK PER OWNERS CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND COORDINATE WORK WITHOTHERS ON SITE.·PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMENSTANDARDS AND BE FREE OF DISEASE AND DAMAGE.··ALL PLANT MATERIALS TO BE WARRANTIED ONE (1) FULL YEAR FROM THE COMPLETION ANDACCEPTANCE BY OWNER, WITH ONE TIME REPLACEMENT.··WATER AND MAINTAIN ALL PLANT MATERIALS UNTIL ACCEPTED BY OWNER.·IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE QUANTITY OF PLANTS SHOW ON THE PLAN COMPAREDTO THE PLANT LEGEND, THE PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE.·ALL AREAS DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION TO RECEIVE 6" OF TOPSOIL AND SOD UNLESSOTHERWISE SPECIFIED ON PLANS.··VERIFY TOPSOIL DEPTH AND NOTIFY OWNER OF ANY DEFICIENCY.··REPLACEMENT TOPSOIL SHOULD BE CLEAN, FREE OF DEBRIS, SHARP OBJECTS, ROCKS ANDWEEDS.··ALL AREAS TO BE LANDSCAPED AND SODDED SHALL BE GRADED SMOOTH AND EVEN.·SOD TO BE A KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS SEED VARIETY.··NO GUARANTEE ON SOD EXCEPT SOD THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT TIME OF INSTALLATION.··STAKE SOD ON SLOPES 3:1 AND GREATER.·PROVIDE BLANKET ON ALL SEEDED AREAS THAT ARE SLOPED. MULCH APPLICATION FOR ALLOTHER SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE HYDROMULCH OR DISCED STRAW DEPENDING ON SEED TYPE.·INSTALL BLACK VINYL EDGING AROUND ALL PLANTING BEDS AS SHOWN ON PLAN.·MULCH TO BE FINELY SHREDDED, UNDYED, HARDWOOD ORGANIC MULCH INSTALLED TO 4"DEPTH.··NO WEED FABRIC BARRIER BENEATH ORGANIC MULCHES.··TREES SHALL HAVE MULCH PULLED BACK 2" FROM BASE OF TRUNK.··NO EDGING AROUND TREES OUTSIDE OF SHRUB BEDS.·ROCK MULCH SHALL BE 1-1/2" DIAMETER WASHED RIVER ROCK INSTALLED TO 3" DEPTH WITHAPPROVED WEED FABRIC BARRIER.·SWEEP AND MAINTAIN ALL PAVEMENT AREAS AFTER LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION IS COMPLETEAND ACCEPTED BY OWNER, DAILY CLEANING TO BE COMPLETED IF REQUIRED BY THEMUNICIPALITY.LANDSCAPEPLANL101Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRN0SCALE: 1"=10'10520LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS·ONE (1) TREE PER 40' OF SITE PERIMETER··676' = 17 TREE REQUIRED··16 PROVIDED + 1 EXISTING TO REMAINSCARIFY & SPREADROOT MASSOVER-EXCAVATE 6"SUBGRADEREMOVE DEAD &BROKEN BRANCHESEXPOSE ROOT FLARE,SET AT FINISH GRADE4" DEPTH MULCHFINISH GRADEPROTECT MAIN LEADER,REMOVE DEAD &BROKEN BRANCHESSTAKE & GUY AS NEEDED4" DEPTH MULCH, DONOT PLACE WITHIN 2"OF TRUNKEXPOSE ROOT FLARE,SET AT FINISH GRADECUT & REMOVE ALLTWINE, BURLAP & WIREBASKET, PLACE ONUNDISTURBED SOILSUBGRADEWRAP TREE, FALLINSTALLATION ONLYFINISH GRADEPage 527 of 1086 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXS 88°51'01" E207.86L=50.05R=946.71N 02°03'51" E127.49 290.08N 64 °47 '26 " E 926 925 926 927926926 927 927927927 927 927927 927 927 927 927SOD4" MULCHSODSODEXISTING SITE TREE TO REMAINPLUG RAIN GARDEN, SEE PLANTSCHEDULE FOR QUANTY & SPACINGEXISTING STREET TREE TO REMAINEXISTING STREET TREE TO REMAIN4" MULCH & EDGING4" MULCH & EDGING4" MULCH4" MULCH4" MULCH & EDGINGSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSODSODSODSOD - --- SYEDGING - --- LFMULCH - --- CY-- SYKENTUCKY BLUE GRASS MIX. SEE SPECS FOR MULCHINGINFORMATION.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT IAM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPEARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.SIGNATURE:____________________JOSEPH L. SCHEFFLERPROJECT NUMBERPROJECT NAMESHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEDate:License #:PLAN-Type SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Minneapolis, MN info@plan-type.com5559706-30-2026DRAWN BYPROJECT MANAGERLOUIEJ + LSTATIONPIZZERIA6016 VERNON AVE,EDINA, MNXXXXISSUE LOGExpiration:09-13-202409-13-2024SUBMITTALNOT FORCONSTRUCT IONIRRIGATION NOTES:·IRRIGATE ENTIRE SITE, DESIGN SHOULD ENCOMPASS ALLLANDSCAPE AREAS WITH SOD AND PLANTINGS.··MINIMIZE OVERSPRAY ON BUILDINGS ANDPAVEMENT.··DRIP IRRIGATION TO BE PROVIDED FOR ALLLANDSCAPE BEDS.·CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICALPLANS FOR WATER STUB OUT AND ELECTRICALLOCATIONS.··CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WATER STUB OUT SIZE ISSUFFICIENT, NOTIFY OWNER OF ANY DEFICIENCY.··CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY CONTROLLER LOCATIONWITH OWNER BEFORE INSTALLATION.··RPZ BACKFLOW PREVENTER TO BE USED AT WATERSTUB OUT.··PREFERRED CONTROLLER SHOULD BE A WATERSENSEWEATHER BASED IRRIGATION CONTROLLER (WBIC).·CONTRACTOR TO HAVE ALL UTILITIES ON SITE VERIFIEDAND MARKED BEFORE STARTING WORK.··CONTRACTOR IS LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TOEXISTING UTILITIES ON SITE AND RESPONSIBLE FORTHE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITHREPAIRING/REPLACING DAMAGE.·CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WITH GENERALCONTRACTOR IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ALL PVC SLEEVESAT A DEPTH OF 2'-0" BELOW FINISHED GRADE. MARKLOCATIONS OF PLACED PVC SLEEVES.·CONTRACTOR TO PLACE MAIN LINES MINIMUM 1'-6"BELOW FINISH GRADE, LATERAL LINES MINIMUM 1'-0'BELOW FINISH GRADE.·WIRES TO BE MINIMUM 16 AWG SOLID COPPER. SPLICEONLY AT BOXES WITH MOISTURE RATED CONNECTORS.·VALVES BOXES AND COVERS SHOULD BE BEST COLOR TOMATCH WITH SURROUNDING LANDSCAPE.··BOXES TO BE SET ON A BASE OF 3" MINIMUM DEPTH3/4" CLEAR GRAVEL.··PLACE BOXES IN LANDSCAPE BEDS WHEN POSSIBLE.·TRENCH BACKFILL TO BE CLEAN, FREE OF DEBRIS, SHARPOBJECTS AND ROCKS.·CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE AS-BUILT DRAWINGS TOOWNERS UPON COMPLETION OF WORK.GROUNDCOVERPLANL102Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRN0SCALE: 1"=10'10520SEED NOTES:·SPRING SEEDING TO BE BETWEEN MARCH 15TH - MAY 15TH.·FALL SEEDING TO BE BETWEEN AUGUST 15TH - OCTOBER 15TH.··NO SUMMER SEEDING ALLOWED.·PROVIDE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ON ALL SIDE SLOPES.Page 528 of 1086 755 Prior Avenue North Suite #301A St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 952.583.9788 www.mdgarchitects.com September 13, 2024 Cary Teague City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 RE: 6016 Vernon Avenue Project Statement Mr. Teague, We are excited to propose the redevelopment of 6016 Vernon Ave. S, formerly Kevin Kee's automotive repair shop, into a vibrant Station Pizzeria. This new establishment will offer a welcoming environment with take-out, delivery, and limited dine-in options. Our plans include a comprehensive interior renovation, an updated exterior, and brand-new landscaping and paving. Additionally, the concrete pad at the rear will be expanded to accommodate walk-in coolers, dry storage, and a trash enclosure. Our design will not only enhance the property's aesthetic appeal but also create a buffer between the restaurant and the surrounding single-family homes. We will install scrubbers on the exhaust hoods to manage any potential odors. Ample parking for both cars and bikes will be provided, ensuring no disruption to the neighborhood streets. Station Pizzeria will be a valuable addition to the area, creating a local gathering space and addressing the current lack of walkable and bikeable dining options. With an already successful location in Minnetonka, this smaller-scale restaurant will bring the same high-quality experience to a new community. Momentum Design Group is an architecture and design firm in St. Paul, with many commercial and multi-family residential projects throughout the metro and beyond, including experience in existing building renovations. Sincerely, Momentum Design Group, LLC. Jesse Hamer, Architect Partner cc: Jake Schaffer, Owner of Station Pizzeria Page 529 of 1086 File #193807268 October 31, 2024 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. One Carlson Parkway Plymouth, MN 55447 Phone: 763-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 Prepared for: City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Traffic and Parking Study for 6016 Vernon Avenue in Edina, MN Page 530 of 1086 October 2024 i Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................... 2-1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... 3-1 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................ 4-1 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 5-4 6.0 PARKING ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 6-1 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 7-1 8.0 APPENDIX ........................................................................................ 8-1 FIGURES FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................. 2-2 FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN ................................................................................ 2-3 FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................. 3-2 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY A.M. AND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES .......................... 4-3 I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. __________________________________ DATE: October 31, 2024 Edward F. Terhaar License No. 24441 Page 531 of 1086 October 2024 1-1 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Station Pizzeria to be located at 6016 Vernon Avenue in Edina, MN. The proposed project location currently contains a vacant auto repair shop. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • Vernon Avenue/Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard • Vernon Avenue/Highwood Drive/Olinger Road • Vernon Avenue/Tracy Avenue • Vernon Avenue/west development access • Vernon Avenue/east development access The proposed project involves remodeling and expanding the existing 1,200 square foot building into a 1,685 square foot pizza restaurant with 20 seats. The site plan shows 27 total parking spaces including 3 tandem spaces to be used by employees and delivery drivers. The proposed hours of operation are 11 am to 9 pm Sunday through Thursday and 11 am to 10 pm Friday and Saturday. A maximum of seven employees are expected on- site during the busiest shift. As shown in the site plan, the project includes two access points on Vernon Avenue. The project is expected to be completed in 2025. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to add 15 trips during the p.m. peak hour and 181 trips daily The proposed development is not open during the a.m. peak hour. • The trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. • Parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used to determine the estimated parking demand for the proposed land use. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 6th Edition, for the High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant use most closely match the proposed restaurant. The ITE data indicates a peak parking demand of 24 spaces on Friday. The 27 total spaces provided are 3 spaces greater than the demand. • Information from the owner on the estimated number of orders per day and the number of employees on-site results in a parking demand of 22 spaces. The 27 total spaces provided are 5 spaces greater than the demand. • Edina City code requires one space per 100 square feet of building space plus one space per employee on the busiest shift, which equates to 24 spaces. The proposed parking supply of 27 total spaces is 3 spaces greater than the City code requirement. Page 532 of 1086 October 2024 1-2 • In order to accommodate the potential excess parking demand, the project owner should develop a parking plan that clearly identifies options for parking demand greater than the spaces provided on-site. This could include items such as providing off-site parking locations for employees during busy times and/or parking delivery vehicles behind other employees in tandem spaces. • Future plans for this area include upgrading to buffered bike lanes on Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, and Olinger Boulevard and new secondary sidewalk on Olinger Boulevard. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. • The project owner is proposing to provide bicycle parking spaces on the north side of the building. • Per City requirements, a Travel Demand Management (TDM) plan is required for this project. The goal of the TDM plan is to reduce vehicular trips during peak hours and carbon emissions from vehicles. TDM strategies for this site include: o Providing maps that show the area bus routes and schedules. o Providing maps of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. o Providing bicycle parking spaces for employees and facility users. The goal of the TDM plan is a 10 percent reduction in single occupant vehicle trips. The TDM plan strategies should be implemented at the time the project is complete and fully operational. Page 533 of 1086 October 2024 2-1 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Station Pizzeria to be located at 6016 Vernon Avenue in Edina, MN. The proposed project location currently contains a vacant auto repair shop. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • Vernon Avenue/Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard • Vernon Avenue/Highwood Drive/Olinger Road • Vernon Avenue/Tracy Avenue • Vernon Avenue/west development access • Vernon Avenue/east development access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project involves remodeling and expanding the existing 1,200 square foot building into a 1,685 square foot pizza restaurant with 20 seats. The site plan shows 27 total parking spaces including 3 tandem spaces to be used by employees and delivery drivers. The proposed hours of operation are 11 am to 9 pm Sunday through Thursday and 11 am to 10 pm Friday and Saturday. A maximum of seven employees are expected on- site during the busiest shift. As shown in the site plan, the project includes two access points on Vernon Avenue. The project is expected to be completed in 2025. The current site plan is shown in Figure 2. Page 534 of 1086 October 2024 2-2 Page 535 of 1086 October 2024 2-3 Page 536 of 1086 October 2024 3-1 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed project location currently contains a vacant auto repair building and parking area. The site is bounded by Vernon Avenue on the south, Eden Prairie Road on the north, and residential uses on the east and west. Near the site location, Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, Olinger Boulevard, Highwood Drive, and Olinger Road are two lane undivided roadways. Existing conditions at the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. Vernon Avenue/Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide a left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide a left turn/through/right turn lane. Vernon Avenue/Highwood Drive/Olinger Road This four-way intersection is controlled with stop signs on the northbound and southbound approaches. All approaches provide one left turn/through/right turn lane. Vernon Avenue/Tracy Avenue This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide a left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides a left turn/through lane and a right turn lane. The southbound approach provides a left turn/through/right turn lane. Traffic Volume Data Weekday traffic volume data at Vernon Avenue/Tracy Avenue was recorded in September, 2024. Traffic volume data at Vernon Avenue/Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard and Vernon Avenue/Highwood Drive/Olinger Road was recorded in April, 2022 for a previous study. Existing traffic volume data is presented later in this report. Page 537 of 1086 October 2024 3-2 Page 538 of 1086 October 2024 4-1 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2026. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: • 2024 Existing. Existing volumes were determined through traffic counts at the subject intersections. The existing volume information includes trips generated by the uses near the project site. • 2026 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2026 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on both recent growth experienced near the site and projected growth due to additional development in the area. • 2026 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2026 No-Build volumes to determine 2026 Build volumes. Trip Generation for Proposed Project Weekday trip generation totals for the proposed use was calculated using data presented in the eleventh edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The resultant gross trip generation estimates are shown in Table 4-1. Table 4-1 Trip Generation for Proposed Project Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant (ITE 932) 1,641 SF 0 0 0 9 6 15 181 Notes: 1) SF=square feet. 2) Restaurant is not open during the a.m. peak hour. As shown, the project adds 15 trips during the p.m. peak hour and 181 trips daily. Trip Distribution Percentages Trip distribution percentages for the subject development trips were established based on the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns, and location of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations. Page 539 of 1086 October 2024 4-2 The distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development are as follows: • 45 percent to/from the east on Vernon Avenue • 10 percent to/from the south on Tracy Avenue • 35 percent to/from the west on Vernon Avenue • 5 percent to/from the north on Blake Road • 3 percent to/from the south on Olinger Boulevard • 2 percent to/from the south on Olinger Road Traffic Volumes Development trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figure 4. Page 540 of 1086 October 2024 4-3 Page 541 of 1086 October 2024 5-4 5.0 Traffic Analysis Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro/SimTraffic software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. In accordance with MnDOT traffic study guidelines, this analysis used the LOS D/E boundary as an indicator of acceptable traffic operations. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: • Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. • Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. • Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. • Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. Page 542 of 1086 October 2024 5-5 The LOS results for the study intersections are discussed below. 2024 Existing Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS Vernon Ave/Blake Rd/Olinger Blvd Signal A/B A/C Vernon Ave/Highwood Dr/Olinger Rd NB/SB stop A/C A/D Vernon Ave/Tracy Ave Signal B/C B/C Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the a.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS C or better. During the p.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS D or better. 2026 No Build Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS Vernon Ave/Blake Rd/Olinger Blvd Signal A/B A/C Vernon Ave/Highwood Dr/Olinger Rd NB/SB stop A/C A/D Vernon Ave/Tracy Ave Signal B/C B/C Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the a.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS C or better. During the p.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS D or better. 2026 Build Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS Vernon Ave/Blake Rd/Olinger Blvd Signal A/B A/C Vernon Ave/Highwood Dr/Olinger Rd NB/SB stop A/C A/D Vernon Ave/Tracy Ave Signal B/C B/C Vernon Ave/west access SB stop A/A A/C Vernon Ave/east access SB stop A/A A/B Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the a.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS C or better. During the p.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS D or better. Overall Traffic Impact The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. Page 543 of 1086 October 2024 5-6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Under existing conditions, sidewalk is provided on the west side of Blake Road, the south side of Vernon Avenue, and the west side of Olinger Road. A two-way off street trail is provided on the west side of Olinger Boulevard. No sidewalk is provided on Highwood Drive. Striped bike lanes are provided on Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, and Olinger Boulevard. Bicycles are allowed on all the surrounding streets. Future plans for this area include upgrading to buffered bike lanes on Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, and Olinger Boulevard and new secondary sidewalk on Olinger Boulevard. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. The project owner is proposing to provide bicycle parking spaces on the north side of the building. Transit Facilities The subject site presently is not directly served by transit. The closest bus stop is on Vernon Avenue at Eden Avenue for Metro Transit bus route 46. Travel Demand Management Plan (TDM) Per City requirements, a Travel Demand Management (TDM) plan is required for this project. The goal of the TDM plan is to reduce vehicular trips during peak hours and carbon emissions from vehicles. TDM strategies for this site include: • Providing maps that show the area bus routes and schedules. • Providing maps of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. • Providing bicycle parking spaces for employees and facility users. The goal of the TDM plan is a 10 percent reduction in single occupant vehicle trips. The TDM plan strategies should be implemented at the time the project is complete and fully operational. Page 544 of 1086 October 2024 6-1 6.0 Parking Analysis As described earlier, the site plan shows 27 total parking spaces including 3 tandem spaces to be used by employees and delivery drivers.. Due to the limitations of the surrounding area to accommodate any overflow parking, the peak parking demand was estimated using multiple information sources as shown below. • Parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used to determine the estimated parking demand for the proposed land use. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 6th Edition, for the High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant use most closely match the proposed restaurant. The ITE data resulted in the following peak parking demand values: ▪ Monday -Thursday = 15 spaces ▪ Friday = 24 spaces ▪ Saturday = 19 spaces The 27 total spaces provided are 3 spaces greater than the peak demand. • Information from the owner estimated 100 orders per day at this location, with approximately 75% occurring between 4 pm to 9 pm. This equates to an average of 15 orders per hour during the 4 pm to 9 pm time period. Each order requires a parking space in addition to the 7 spaces for employees, which results in a parking demand of 22 spaces. The 27 total spaces provided are 5 spaces greater than the peak demand. • Edina City code requires one space per 100 square feet of building space plus one space per employee on the busiest shift, which equates to 24 spaces. The 27 total spaces provided are 3 spaces greater than the City code requirement. At some locations, parking overflow can be accommodated on the surrounding streets. In this case, however, on-street parking is not allowed on Vernon Avenue near the proposed project. In order to accommodate potential excess parking demand, the project owner should develop a parking plan that clearly identifies options for parking demand greater than the spaces provided on-site. This could include items such as providing off-site parking locations for employees during busy times and/or parking delivery vehicles behind other employees in tandem spaces. Page 545 of 1086 October 2024 7-1 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to add 15 trips during the p.m. peak hour and 181 trips daily The proposed development is not open during the a.m. peak hour. • The trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. • Parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used to determine the estimated parking demand for the proposed land use. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 6th Edition, for the High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant use most closely match the proposed restaurant. The ITE data indicates a peak parking demand of 24 spaces on Friday. The 27 total spaces provided are 3 spaces greater than the demand. • Information from the owner on the estimated number of orders per day and the number of employees on-site results in a parking demand of 22 spaces. The 27 total spaces provided are 5 spaces greater than the demand. • Edina City code requires one space per 100 square feet of building space plus one space per employee on the busiest shift, which equates to 24 spaces. The proposed parking supply of 27 total spaces is 3 spaces greater than the City code requirement. • In order to accommodate the potential excess parking demand, the project owner should develop a parking plan that clearly identifies options for parking demand greater than the spaces provided on-site. This could include items such as providing off-site parking locations for employees during busy times and/or parking delivery vehicles behind other employees in tandem spaces. • Future plans for this area include upgrading to buffered bike lanes on Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, and Olinger Boulevard and new secondary sidewalk on Olinger Boulevard. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. • The project owner is proposing to provide bicycle parking spaces on the north side of the building. Page 546 of 1086 October 2024 7-2 • Per City requirements, a Travel Demand Management (TDM) plan is required for this project. The goal of the TDM plan is to reduce vehicular trips during peak hours and carbon emissions from vehicles. TDM strategies for this site include: o Providing maps that show the area bus routes and schedules. o Providing maps of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. o Providing bicycle parking spaces for employees and facility users. The goal of the TDM plan is a 10 percent reduction in single occupant vehicle trips. The TDM plan strategies should be implemented at the time the project is complete and fully operational. Page 547 of 1086 October 2024 8-1 8.0 Appendix • Level of Service Worksheets Page 548 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 54 334 27 2 323 26 26 17 4 58 12 67 Future Volume (veh/h) 54 334 27 2 323 26 26 17 4 58 12 67 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 59 363 29 2 351 28 28 18 4 63 13 73 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 730 1108 89 719 1108 88 231 121 19 197 34 106 Arrive On Green 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 Sat Flow, veh/h 1004 1709 137 992 1709 136 707 866 137 546 246 761 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 59 0 392 2 0 379 50 0 0 149 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1004 0 1846 992 0 1846 1710 0 0 1552 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.0 0.0 4.0 4.1 0.0 3.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.07 0.56 0.08 0.42 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 730 0 1197 719 0 1197 371 0 0 337 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 730 0 1197 719 0 1197 990 0 0 966 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.4 0.0 3.3 4.2 0.0 3.3 16.1 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.6 0.0 4.1 4.2 0.0 4.0 16.3 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A B A A Approach Vol, veh/h 451 381 50 149 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.1 4.0 16.3 18.2 Approach LOS A A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.4 32.0 10.4 32.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 27.5 23.5 27.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 7.0 5.8 6.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.7 0.7 2.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.7 HCM 6th LOS A Page 549 of 1086 HCM 6th TWSC 2024 AM 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 384 7 32 333 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Future Vol, veh/h 5 384 7 32 333 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 417 8 35 362 10 11 3 16 23 8 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 372 0 0 425 0 0 877 873 421 878 872 367 Stage 1 - - - - - - 431 431 - 437 437 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 446 442 - 441 435 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1186 - - 1134 - - 269 289 632 268 289 678 Stage 1 - - - - - - 603 583 - 598 579 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 591 576 - 595 580 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1186 - - 1134 - - 251 276 632 250 276 678 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 251 276 - 250 276 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 599 580 - 594 556 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 553 554 - 573 577 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.7 15.4 19 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 376 1186 - - 1134 - - 297 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.081 0.005 - - 0.031 - - 0.132 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.4 8 0 - 8.3 0 - 19 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.4 Page 550 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 606 54 104 379 84 41 40 132 69 40 17 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 606 54 104 379 84 41 40 132 69 40 17 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 697 62 120 436 97 47 46 152 79 46 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 565 832 74 440 787 175 195 161 249 178 86 27 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.49 0.49 0.13 0.53 0.53 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1693 151 1781 1481 330 663 1025 1585 540 547 174 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 25 0 759 120 0 533 93 0 152 145 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1843 1781 0 1811 1688 0 1585 1261 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 21.3 1.7 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 5.3 4.1 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 21.3 1.7 0.0 11.7 2.7 0.0 5.3 6.8 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.18 0.51 1.00 0.54 0.14 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 565 0 906 440 0 962 356 0 249 291 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.84 0.27 0.00 0.55 0.26 0.00 0.61 0.50 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 565 0 1496 440 0 1543 645 0 544 551 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.2 0.0 13.1 9.3 0.0 9.3 22.3 0.0 23.5 24.2 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 2.3 1.5 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 2.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 7.8 0.6 0.0 3.8 1.1 0.0 2.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.3 0.0 15.4 10.8 0.0 9.8 22.7 0.0 25.9 25.5 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 784 653 245 145 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.1 10.0 24.7 25.5 Approach LOS B A C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.9 12.0 33.9 13.9 9.6 36.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 7.5 48.5 20.5 5.1 50.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.3 3.7 23.3 8.8 2.4 13.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.1 6.1 0.6 0.0 4.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.4 HCM 6th LOS B Page 551 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 AM No Build 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 55 341 28 2 329 27 27 17 4 59 12 68 Future Volume (veh/h) 55 341 28 2 329 27 27 17 4 59 12 68 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 371 30 2 358 29 29 18 4 64 13 74 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 721 1105 89 710 1105 89 235 119 19 198 35 107 Arrive On Green 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 Sat Flow, veh/h 997 1707 138 984 1707 138 727 847 134 547 245 761 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 0 401 2 0 387 51 0 0 151 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 997 0 1846 984 0 1845 1708 0 0 1552 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.2 0.0 4.2 4.2 0.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.07 0.57 0.08 0.42 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 721 0 1194 710 0 1194 374 0 0 340 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 721 0 1194 710 0 1194 987 0 0 964 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.5 0.0 3.4 4.3 0.0 3.3 16.1 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.7 0.0 4.1 4.3 0.0 4.1 16.3 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A B A A Approach Vol, veh/h 461 389 51 151 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.2 4.1 16.3 18.2 Approach LOS A A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.5 32.0 10.5 32.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 27.5 23.5 27.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 7.2 5.9 6.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.7 0.7 2.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.8 HCM 6th LOS A Page 552 of 1086 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 AM No Build 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 392 7 33 340 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Future Vol, veh/h 5 392 7 33 340 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 426 8 36 370 10 11 3 16 23 8 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 380 0 0 434 0 0 896 892 430 897 891 375 Stage 1 - - - - - - 440 440 - 447 447 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 456 452 - 450 444 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1178 - - 1126 - - 261 281 625 261 282 671 Stage 1 - - - - - - 596 578 - 591 573 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 584 570 - 589 575 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1178 - - 1126 - - 243 268 625 243 269 671 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 243 268 - 243 269 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 592 575 - 587 550 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 545 547 - 567 572 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.7 15.7 19.4 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 367 1178 - - 1126 - - 289 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.083 0.005 - - 0.032 - - 0.135 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.7 8.1 0 - 8.3 0 - 19.4 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.5 Page 553 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 AM No Build 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 618 55 106 387 86 42 41 135 70 41 17 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 618 55 106 387 86 42 41 135 70 41 17 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 710 63 122 445 99 48 47 155 80 47 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 557 842 75 430 795 177 194 161 252 176 87 27 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.50 0.50 0.12 0.54 0.54 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1693 150 1781 1481 330 660 1011 1585 535 546 170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 25 0 773 122 0 544 95 0 155 147 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1843 1781 0 1811 1671 0 1585 1251 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 22.2 1.7 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 5.6 4.3 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 22.2 1.7 0.0 12.2 2.9 0.0 5.6 7.2 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.18 0.51 1.00 0.54 0.14 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 557 0 916 430 0 971 355 0 252 290 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.84 0.28 0.00 0.56 0.27 0.00 0.61 0.51 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 557 0 1463 430 0 1509 629 0 532 536 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.3 0.0 13.3 9.6 0.0 9.4 22.8 0.0 23.9 24.7 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 2.7 1.7 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 2.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 8.2 0.7 0.0 4.0 1.2 0.0 2.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.4 0.0 16.0 11.3 0.0 9.9 23.2 0.0 26.4 26.1 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 798 666 250 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.7 10.1 25.1 26.1 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.2 12.0 34.9 14.2 9.6 37.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 7.5 48.5 20.5 5.1 50.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.6 3.7 24.2 9.2 2.4 14.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.1 6.2 0.6 0.0 4.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.8 HCM 6th LOS B Page 554 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 AM Build 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 55 341 28 2 329 27 27 17 4 59 12 68 Future Volume (veh/h) 55 341 28 2 329 27 27 17 4 59 12 68 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 371 30 2 358 29 29 18 4 64 13 74 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 721 1105 89 710 1105 89 235 119 19 198 35 107 Arrive On Green 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 Sat Flow, veh/h 997 1707 138 984 1707 138 727 847 134 547 245 761 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 0 401 2 0 387 51 0 0 151 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 997 0 1846 984 0 1845 1708 0 0 1552 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.2 0.0 4.2 4.2 0.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.07 0.57 0.08 0.42 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 721 0 1194 710 0 1194 374 0 0 340 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 721 0 1194 710 0 1194 987 0 0 964 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.5 0.0 3.4 4.3 0.0 3.3 16.1 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.7 0.0 4.1 4.3 0.0 4.1 16.3 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A B A A Approach Vol, veh/h 461 389 51 151 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.2 4.1 16.3 18.2 Approach LOS A A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.5 32.0 10.5 32.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 27.5 23.5 27.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 7.2 5.9 6.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.7 0.7 2.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.8 HCM 6th LOS A Page 555 of 1086 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 AM Build 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 392 7 33 340 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Future Vol, veh/h 5 392 7 33 340 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 426 8 36 370 10 11 3 16 23 8 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 380 0 0 434 0 0 896 892 430 897 891 375 Stage 1 - - - - - - 440 440 - 447 447 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 456 452 - 450 444 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1178 - - 1126 - - 261 281 625 261 282 671 Stage 1 - - - - - - 596 578 - 591 573 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 584 570 - 589 575 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1178 - - 1126 - - 243 268 625 243 269 671 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 243 268 - 243 269 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 592 575 - 587 550 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 545 547 - 567 572 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.7 15.7 19.4 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 367 1178 - - 1126 - - 289 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.083 0.005 - - 0.032 - - 0.135 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.7 8.1 0 - 8.3 0 - 19.4 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.5 Page 556 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 AM Build 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 618 55 106 387 86 42 41 135 70 41 17 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 618 55 106 387 86 42 41 135 70 41 17 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 710 63 122 445 99 48 47 155 80 47 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 557 842 75 430 795 177 194 161 252 176 87 27 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.50 0.50 0.12 0.54 0.54 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1693 150 1781 1481 330 660 1011 1585 535 546 170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 25 0 773 122 0 544 95 0 155 147 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1843 1781 0 1811 1671 0 1585 1251 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 22.2 1.7 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 5.6 4.3 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 22.2 1.7 0.0 12.2 2.9 0.0 5.6 7.2 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.18 0.51 1.00 0.54 0.14 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 557 0 916 430 0 971 355 0 252 290 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.84 0.28 0.00 0.56 0.27 0.00 0.61 0.51 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 557 0 1463 430 0 1509 629 0 532 536 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.3 0.0 13.3 9.6 0.0 9.4 22.8 0.0 23.9 24.7 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 2.7 1.7 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 2.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 8.2 0.7 0.0 4.0 1.2 0.0 2.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.4 0.0 16.0 11.3 0.0 9.9 23.2 0.0 26.4 26.1 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 798 666 250 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.7 10.1 25.1 26.1 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.2 12.0 34.9 14.2 9.6 37.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 7.5 48.5 20.5 5.1 50.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.6 3.7 24.2 9.2 2.4 14.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.1 6.2 0.6 0.0 4.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.8 HCM 6th LOS B Page 557 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 671 38 32 256 45 16 30 4 45 36 53 Future Volume (veh/h) 70 671 38 32 256 45 16 30 4 45 36 53 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 729 41 35 278 49 17 33 4 49 39 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 791 1185 67 466 1046 184 145 171 17 159 71 83 Arrive On Green 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 1053 1754 99 699 1548 273 330 1307 131 423 543 637 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 0 770 35 0 327 54 0 0 146 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1053 0 1853 699 0 1821 1768 0 0 1603 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.4 0.0 10.7 1.4 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.7 0.0 10.7 12.1 0.0 3.3 1.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.15 0.31 0.07 0.34 0.40 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 791 0 1252 466 0 1231 333 0 0 313 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.10 0.00 0.61 0.08 0.00 0.27 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 791 0 1252 466 0 1231 800 0 0 763 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 3.9 0.0 4.2 7.5 0.0 3.0 18.1 0.0 0.0 19.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 2.3 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 2.5 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.2 0.0 6.5 7.9 0.0 3.5 18.4 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 846 362 54 146 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.3 3.9 18.4 20.4 Approach LOS A A B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.6 36.0 10.6 36.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 31.5 19.5 31.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 12.7 6.0 14.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 5.9 0.6 2.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 7.6 HCM 6th LOS A Page 558 of 1086 HCM 6th TWSC 2024 PM 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 716 12 29 302 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Future Vol, veh/h 5 716 12 29 302 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 778 13 32 328 21 9 2 13 9 2 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 349 0 0 791 0 0 1199 1208 785 1205 1204 339 Stage 1 - - - - - - 795 795 - 403 403 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 404 413 - 802 801 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 829 - - 162 183 393 161 184 703 Stage 1 - - - - - - 381 399 - 624 600 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 623 594 - 378 397 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 829 - - 154 173 393 148 174 703 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 154 173 - 148 174 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 378 396 - 620 571 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 591 565 - 361 394 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.8 22.1 30.3 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 234 1210 - - 829 - - 153 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.102 0.004 - - 0.038 - - 0.071 HCM Control Delay (s) 22.1 8 0 - 9.5 0 - 30.3 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.2 Page 559 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 24 697 47 122 416 57 65 47 188 21 22 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 24 697 47 122 416 57 65 47 188 21 22 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 24 711 48 124 424 58 66 48 192 21 22 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 590 842 57 417 822 112 230 142 263 144 133 67 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.49 0.49 0.11 0.51 0.51 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1732 117 1781 1610 220 788 855 1585 354 804 404 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 24 0 759 124 0 482 114 0 192 58 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1849 1781 0 1831 1643 0 1585 1561 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 0.0 20.5 1.7 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 0.0 20.5 1.7 0.0 10.0 3.2 0.0 6.6 3.2 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.12 0.58 1.00 0.36 0.26 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 590 0 898 417 0 934 371 0 263 344 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.84 0.30 0.00 0.52 0.31 0.00 0.73 0.17 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 590 0 1305 417 0 1337 640 0 539 599 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 5.9 0.0 12.9 9.4 0.0 9.3 21.3 0.0 22.7 20.6 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 3.6 1.8 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.0 3.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 7.7 0.7 0.0 3.3 1.3 0.0 2.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.1 0.0 16.4 11.2 0.0 9.8 21.7 0.0 26.6 20.9 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 783 606 306 58 Approach Delay, s/veh 16.1 10.1 24.8 20.9 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.0 11.0 32.4 14.0 9.6 33.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 6.5 40.5 19.5 5.1 41.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.6 3.7 22.5 5.2 2.3 12.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.1 5.3 0.2 0.0 3.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.7 HCM 6th LOS B Page 560 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 PM No Build 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 71 684 39 33 261 46 16 30 4 45 36 53 Future Volume (veh/h) 71 684 39 33 261 46 16 30 4 45 36 53 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 77 743 42 36 284 50 17 33 4 49 39 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 785 1185 67 456 1047 184 145 171 17 159 71 83 Arrive On Green 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 1046 1753 99 689 1549 273 330 1307 131 423 543 637 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 77 0 785 36 0 334 54 0 0 146 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1046 0 1853 689 0 1821 1768 0 0 1603 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 0.0 11.1 1.4 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.9 0.0 11.1 12.6 0.0 3.4 1.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.15 0.31 0.07 0.34 0.40 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 785 0 1252 456 0 1231 333 0 0 313 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.10 0.00 0.63 0.08 0.00 0.27 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 785 0 1252 456 0 1231 800 0 0 763 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.0 0.0 4.2 7.8 0.0 3.0 18.1 0.0 0.0 19.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 2.4 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 2.6 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.2 0.0 6.6 8.1 0.0 3.5 18.4 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 862 370 54 146 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.4 4.0 18.4 20.4 Approach LOS A A B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.6 36.0 10.6 36.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 31.5 19.5 31.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 13.1 6.0 14.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 6.0 0.6 2.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 7.7 HCM 6th LOS A Page 561 of 1086 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 PM No Build 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 716 12 29 302 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Future Vol, veh/h 5 716 12 29 302 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 778 13 32 328 21 9 2 13 9 2 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 349 0 0 791 0 0 1199 1208 785 1205 1204 339 Stage 1 - - - - - - 795 795 - 403 403 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 404 413 - 802 801 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 829 - - 162 183 393 161 184 703 Stage 1 - - - - - - 381 399 - 624 600 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 623 594 - 378 397 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 829 - - 154 173 393 148 174 703 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 154 173 - 148 174 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 378 396 - 620 571 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 591 565 - 361 394 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.8 22.1 30.3 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 234 1210 - - 829 - - 153 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.102 0.004 - - 0.038 - - 0.071 HCM Control Delay (s) 22.1 8 0 - 9.5 0 - 30.3 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.2 Page 562 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 PM No Build 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 24 711 48 124 424 58 66 48 192 21 22 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 24 711 48 124 424 58 66 48 192 21 22 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 24 726 49 127 433 59 67 49 196 21 22 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 583 852 58 407 831 113 229 143 265 142 132 67 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.49 0.49 0.11 0.52 0.52 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1732 117 1781 1611 220 791 853 1585 352 792 399 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 24 0 775 127 0 492 116 0 196 58 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1849 1781 0 1831 1644 0 1585 1542 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 0.0 21.5 1.8 0.0 10.4 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 0.0 21.5 1.8 0.0 10.4 3.3 0.0 6.9 3.3 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.12 0.58 1.00 0.36 0.26 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 583 0 910 407 0 944 372 0 265 342 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.85 0.31 0.00 0.52 0.31 0.00 0.74 0.17 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 583 0 1276 407 0 1307 627 0 527 582 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.0 0.0 13.0 9.8 0.0 9.4 21.7 0.0 23.2 21.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 4.1 2.0 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.0 4.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 8.3 0.7 0.0 3.5 1.4 0.0 2.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.1 0.0 17.2 11.8 0.0 9.9 22.2 0.0 27.2 21.3 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 799 619 312 58 Approach Delay, s/veh 16.8 10.3 25.4 21.3 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.3 11.0 33.4 14.3 9.6 34.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 6.5 40.5 19.5 5.1 41.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.9 3.8 23.5 5.3 2.3 12.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.1 5.4 0.2 0.0 3.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.2 HCM 6th LOS B Page 563 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 PM Build 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 71 687 39 33 263 46 16 30 4 46 36 53 Future Volume (veh/h) 71 687 39 33 263 46 16 30 4 46 36 53 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 77 747 42 36 286 50 17 33 4 50 39 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 783 1184 67 453 1047 183 145 173 17 160 71 83 Arrive On Green 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 1044 1754 99 687 1551 271 329 1309 131 429 540 632 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 77 0 789 36 0 336 54 0 0 147 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1044 0 1853 687 0 1822 1768 0 0 1602 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 0.0 11.2 1.5 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.9 0.0 11.2 12.7 0.0 3.4 1.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.15 0.31 0.07 0.34 0.39 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 783 0 1251 453 0 1230 335 0 0 315 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.10 0.00 0.63 0.08 0.00 0.27 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 783 0 1251 453 0 1230 799 0 0 762 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.0 0.0 4.3 7.9 0.0 3.0 18.1 0.0 0.0 19.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 2.4 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 2.7 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.2 0.0 6.7 8.2 0.0 3.6 18.3 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 866 372 54 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.5 4.0 18.3 20.4 Approach LOS A A B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.6 36.0 10.6 36.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 31.5 19.5 31.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 13.2 6.0 14.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 6.0 0.6 2.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 7.7 HCM 6th LOS A Page 564 of 1086 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 PM Build 11: Vernon Ave & west Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 733 311 0 2 1 Future Vol, veh/h 4 733 311 0 2 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 797 338 0 2 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 338 0 - 0 1143 338 Stage 1 - - - - 338 - Stage 2 - - - - 805 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1221 - - - 221 704 Stage 1 - - - - 722 - Stage 2 - - - - 440 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1221 - - - 220 704 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 220 - Stage 1 - - - - 718 - Stage 2 - - - - 440 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 17.8 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1221 - - - 285 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - - 0.011 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 0 - - 17.8 HCM Lane LOS A A - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 Page 565 of 1086 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 PM Build 9: Vernon Ave & east Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 735 310 5 1 2 Future Vol, veh/h 0 735 310 5 1 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 799 337 5 1 2 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 342 0 - 0 1139 340 Stage 1 - - - - 340 - Stage 2 - - - - 799 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1217 - - - 223 702 Stage 1 - - - - 721 - Stage 2 - - - - 443 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1217 - - - 223 702 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 223 - Stage 1 - - - - 721 - Stage 2 - - - - 443 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 13.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1217 - - - 409 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - 0.008 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - - 13.9 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 Page 566 of 1086 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 PM Build 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 720 12 29 307 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Future Vol, veh/h 5 720 12 29 307 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 783 13 32 334 21 9 2 13 9 2 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 355 0 0 796 0 0 1210 1219 790 1216 1215 345 Stage 1 - - - - - - 800 800 - 409 409 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 410 419 - 807 806 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1204 - - 826 - - 159 180 390 158 181 698 Stage 1 - - - - - - 379 397 - 619 596 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 619 590 - 375 395 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1204 - - 826 - - 151 170 390 145 171 698 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 151 170 - 145 171 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 376 394 - 615 567 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 587 562 - 358 392 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.8 22.5 30.9 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 230 1204 - - 826 - - 150 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.104 0.005 - - 0.038 - - 0.072 HCM Control Delay (s) 22.5 8 0 - 9.5 0 - 30.9 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.2 Page 567 of 1086 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 PM Build 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 24 714 49 124 428 58 67 48 192 21 22 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 24 714 49 124 428 58 67 48 192 21 22 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 24 729 50 127 437 59 68 49 196 21 22 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 581 854 59 405 835 113 230 141 265 142 132 66 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.49 0.49 0.11 0.52 0.52 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1730 119 1781 1613 218 799 845 1585 350 788 397 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 24 0 779 127 0 496 117 0 196 58 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1849 1781 0 1831 1644 0 1585 1535 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 0.0 21.7 1.8 0.0 10.6 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 0.0 21.7 1.8 0.0 10.6 3.3 0.0 6.9 3.3 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.12 0.58 1.00 0.36 0.26 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 581 0 913 405 0 947 371 0 265 340 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.85 0.31 0.00 0.52 0.31 0.00 0.74 0.17 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 581 0 1270 405 0 1302 624 0 524 579 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.0 0.0 13.1 9.9 0.0 9.4 21.8 0.0 23.3 21.1 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 4.3 2.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 4.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 8.3 0.7 0.0 3.5 1.4 0.0 2.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.1 0.0 17.3 11.9 0.0 9.9 22.3 0.0 27.4 21.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 803 623 313 58 Approach Delay, s/veh 17.0 10.3 25.5 21.4 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.4 11.0 33.6 14.4 9.6 35.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 6.5 40.5 19.5 5.1 41.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.9 3.8 23.7 5.3 2.3 12.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.1 5.4 0.2 0.0 3.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.3 HCM 6th LOS B Page 568 of 1086 Site Page 569 of 1086 Page 570 of 1086 Site Page 571 of 1086 Page 572 of 1086 Page 573 of 1086 Buildable Area Page 574 of 1086 0’ 9’ 13’ 20’ 0’ Lot Size – 16,373 s.f. Buildable Area and Requested Variances Page 575 of 1086 Proposed Restaurant Floor Plan Page 576 of 1086 2E8dinaMN.gov Previously Proposed Restaurant Floor Plan Page 577 of 1086 2E7dinaMN.gov 4 12 5 0 1 316 Previously Proposed Restaurant Variances Required Page 578 of 1086 Page 579 of 1086 Page 580 of 1086 t-rem-vic2-09 · LB 1528 · 8/5/21 March 1, 2022 VIA EMAIL Marty Collins Special X Properties LLC 6016 Vernon Ave S Edina, MN 55436-1908 RE: No Association Determination Kevin Kee's Auto Service, 6016 Vernon Ave, Edina MPCA Site ID: BF0001999 Billing ID: 104880 PIN: 3211721230027 Dear Marty Collins: This letter is in response to the request from Greg Browne of The Javelin Group, Inc. for a determination under Minn. Stat. § 115B.178 that certain actions proposed to be taken by Special X Properties LLC at the Kevin Kee's Auto Service site, located at the address referenced above (the Site), will not constitute conduct associating Special X Properties LLC with the release or threatened release of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants at the Site for the purpose of Minn. Stat. § 115B.03, subd. 3(4). The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff in the Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program has reviewed the documents submitted for the Site. The 0.38-acre Site was undeveloped until construction of the current Site building in 1957. The building was occupied by a gas station until the early 1990s and has since operated as an auto repair shop. A petroleum release was discovered in November 1992 when underground storage tanks were being removed from the Site. The leak site (MPCA Site ID# LS0002247) was closed in February 2002. Special X Properties LLC intends to renovate the existing Site building for use as a restaurant. An environmental investigation completed at the Site in September 2021 included three interior soil borings and one exterior soil boring. Four soil samples were collected and analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and diesel range organics (DRO); two of the soil samples were also analyzed for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals and one sample for polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Tetrachloroethene (PCE) was detected in one sample collected near the flammable waste trap at a concentration of 0.24 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), which is greater than the MPCA’s screening soil leaching value (SLV). Groundwater was not encountered during the investigation. Five exterior soil vapor samples were collected at the Site in August 2018 and three sub-slab soil vapor samples were collected at the Site in September 2021 (non-heating season) and November 2021 (heating season). PCE was detected at a maximum concentration of 279 μg/m3, which is less than the MPCA action level of thirty-three times (33X) its commercial intrusion screening value (ISV). Low concentrations of cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE) were also detected in soil vapor. Page 581 of 1086 Marty Collins Page 2 March 1, 2022 For the purpose of this letter, the identified release consists of PCE in soil, and PCE, cis-1,2-DCE and other non-petroleum-VOCs in soil vapor (Identified Release). This letter does not address petroleum- related contaminants. Petroleum contamination detected at the Site is under the oversight of the MPCA’s Petroleum Brownfield Program. Based upon a review of the information provided to the MPCA VIC Program, and subject to the conditions set forth in this letter, a determination is hereby made pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 115B.178, subd. 1 that the proposed actions (Proposed Actions) listed below will not associate Special X Properties LLC with the Identified Release for the purpose of Minn. Stat. § 115B.03, subd. 3(4). This determination applies only to the following Proposed Actions: • Purchase of the Site; • Renovation of the existing Site building for use as a restaurant; and • Operation and maintenance of the Site building, grounds, and related infrastructure. This determination is made in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 115B.178, subd. 1, and is subject to the following conditions: 1. The Proposed Actions shall be carried out as described herein. 2. Special X Properties LLC shall cooperate with the MPCA, its employees, contractors, and others acting at the MPCA’s direction, in the event that the MPCA takes, or directs others to take, response actions at the Site to address the Identified Release or any other as yet unidentified release or threatened release of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant, including, but not limited to, granting access to the Site so that response actions can be taken. 3. Special X Properties LLC shall avoid actions that contribute to the Identified Release or that interfere with response actions required under any MPCA-approved response action plan to address the Identified Release. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 115B.178, subd.1, when Special X Properties LLC takes the Proposed Actions in accordance with the determination in this letter, subject to the conditions stated herein, the Proposed Actions will not associate Special X Properties LLC with the Identified Release for the purpose of Minn. Stat. § 115B.03, subd. 3(4). The determination made in this letter applies to Special X Properties LLC’s successors and assigns if the successors and assigns: 1) are not otherwise responsible for the Identified Release at the Site; 2) do not engage in activities with respect to the Identified Release which are substantially different from the activities which Special X Properties LLC proposes to take, as described herein; and 3) comply with the conditions set forth in this letter. Please be advised that the determination made in this letter is subject to the disclaimers found in Attachment A and is contingent on compliance with the terms and conditions set forth herein. Page 582 of 1086 Marty Collins Page 3 March 1, 2022 If you have any questions about the contents of this letter, please contact Amanda Guertin, Project Manager/Hydrologist, at 651-757-2369 or by email at amanda.guertin@state.mn.us. Sincerely, Amy K. Hadiaris This document has been electronically signed. Amy K. Hadiaris, P.G. Supervisor Redevelopment Unit Remediation Division AKH/AG:akh Enclosure cc: Greg Browne, The Javelin Group, Inc. Sharon Allison, City of Edina John Evans, Hennepin County Page 583 of 1086 Attachment A Page 1 of 1 Disclaimers Kevin Kee's Auto Service MPCA Site ID: BF0001999 1. Reservation of authorities The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Commissioner reserves the authority to take any appropriate actions with respect to any release, threatened release, or other conditions at the Site. The MPCA Commissioner also reserves the authority to take such actions if the voluntary party does not proceed in the manner described in this letter or if actions taken or omitted by the voluntary party with respect to the Site contribute to any release or threatened release, or create an imminent and substantial danger to public health and welfare. 2. No MPCA assumption of liability The MPCA, its Commissioner, and staff do not assume any liability for any release, threatened release or other conditions at the Site or for any actions taken or omitted by the voluntary party with regard to the release, threatened release, or other conditions at the Site, whether the actions taken or omitted are in accordance with this letter or otherwise. 3. Letter based on current information All statements, conclusions, and representations in this letter are based upon information known to the MPCA Commissioner and staff at the time this letter was issued. The MPCA Commissioner and staff reserve the authority to modify or rescind any such statement, conclusion or representation and to take any appropriate action under his authority if the MPCA Commissioner or staff acquires information after issuance of this letter that provides a basis for such modification or action. 4. Disclaimer regarding use or development of the property The MPCA, its Commissioner, and staff do not warrant that the Site is suitable or appropriate for any particular use. 5. Disclaimer regarding investigative or response action at the property Nothing in this letter is intended to authorize any response action under Minn. Stat. § 115B.17, subd. 12. 6. This approval does not supplant any applicable state or local stormwater permits, ordinances, or other regulatory documents. Page 584 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan Review with Variances 6016 Vernon Avenue Page 585 of 1086 Page 586 of 1086 Page 587 of 1086 Site Page 588 of 1086 Page 589 of 1086 Page 590 of 1086 Page 591 of 1086 Revisions from Sketch Plan ➢Created indoor seating for 20 people. ➢Added a building addition on the west side of the building for dry storage/coolers. ➢Created a paved area for bike parking on the north side of the building. ➢Added tandem parking for employees. Page 592 of 1086 Page 593 of 1086 Page 594 of 1086 This Request Requires: To accommodate the request the following is required: ➢A Comprehensive Plan Amendment from MDR, Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial (a new land use designation). ➢A Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District 4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District 1, with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than 1 acre in size. ➢Site Plan Review with the following Variances: 1.A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. 2.A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. 3.Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. Page 595 of 1086 0’ 9’ 13’ 20’ 0’ Page 596 of 1086 Page 597 of 1086 Primary Issues ➢Is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment reasonable? ➢Is the proposed Rezoning to PCD-1 reasonable? ➢Are the proposed Variances justified? Page 598 of 1086 For this project, the City of Edina has complete discretion to approve or deny this request. A case can be made for both approval and denial of this project. Findings for both approval and denial of this project are provided for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider. Page 599 of 1086 Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Page 600 of 1086 Page 601 of 1086 Page 602 of 1086 Comprehensive Plan Amendment: 1.The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a small-scale restaurant. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be consistent with the existing commercial zoning on the site. 2.The existing zoning is PCD-4, which allows automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. The Metropolitan Council requires cities to have their land use plan within the Comprehensive Plan, consistent with their zoning designations. 3.The amendment creates a new smaller scale land use category that is currently not included in the Comprehensive Plan. The closest existing category is the NN, Neighborhood Node. This site is too small to be considered a node. 4.The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is more compatible with adjacent land uses than the previous gas station and automobile service station located on the site. The use would be more intensive in terms of traffic generated and activity on the site. (120 daily trips for a 1,200 s.f. automobile care center and 181 daily trips for the restaurant.) Green space and landscaping would be added to improve the visual appeal of the site. The existing fence that is in a very poor condition would be replaced by a 6-foot-tall cedar fence. The fence would be located along the north and west lot lines to provide screening. The existing building would be used rather than tearing it down and replacing it. The proposal would be an improvement to the site compared to current conditions. 5. The proposed use would be supported by the existing roads. The number of vehicular trips to the site would have minimal impact on the existing roads. (See page 7-1 of the traffic study.) The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is reasonable for the following reasons: Page 603 of 1086 Rezoning to PCD-1 Per Section 36-216 of the City Code, the Commission may recommend approval by the council based upon, but not limited to, the factors below. As mentioned previously with a Rezoning and a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the City has complete discretion to approve or deny this request. A case can be made for approval and denial on this one. (See alternatives on pages 11-14 in this report.) ➢ Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. ➢ Will not be detrimental to properties surrounding the tract. ➢ Will not result in an overly intensive land use. ➢ Will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards. ➢ Conforms to the provisions of this section and other applicable provisions of this Code. ➢ Provides a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. Page 604 of 1086 Rezoning to PCD-1 Staff supports the request for the following reasons: 1. If the Comprehensive Plan Amendment were approved, the findings for rezoning per Section 36-216 of the City Code would be met. 2. The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a small-scale restaurant and reuse and restoration of the existing building. 3. If the site plan is properly designed for a restaurant and hours of operation are regulated, the use itself would not be detrimental to the adjacent residential neighborhood. Hours of operation are proposed to be 11am-9pm Sunday through Thursday and 11am-10pm on Friday and Saturday. Hours could be further regulated through a liquor license or the rezoning. 4. Parking regulations and setback requirements would provide the City with some safeguards regarding any expansion and intensification of the use. The proposed parking would meet the minimum parking standards, and the traffic study determined that the existing roads would support the restaurant. 5. There is adequate separation between buildings and the site would be screened by landscaping and fencing to minimize impact on adjacent properties. Page 605 of 1086 Page 606 of 1086 Page 607 of 1086 Variances ➢Variance Criteria Page 608 of 1086 Variances Yes. Subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, staff believes that the Variances requested with this project are reasonable and meet the variance criteria as outlined below. ➢The existing use on the property has been commercial for over 50 years. The re-zoning would be generally consistent with existing zoning on the site. ➢The closest adjacent structure would be 105+/- feet away and would be screened by fencing and landscaping. ➢The practical difficulties include the existing small lot size, irregular shape of the lot and street frontages on two of the three sides. ➢It would be difficult to build anything on this site without a variance, due to the small size and shape of the lot. (See attached buildable area.) ➢The proposed Cedar Fence along the west and north lot lines would minimize impact on the adjacent residential use to the north and west. ➢The proposal would be an improvement over existing conditions and use of the site. Page 609 of 1086 0’ 9’ 13’ 20’ 0’ Lot Size – 16,373 s.f. Page 610 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov27 4 12 5 0 1 316 Page 611 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov28 Page 612 of 1086 Staff Recommendation Page 613 of 1086 Page 614 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-107 DENIAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AT 6016 VERNON AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01. Jake Schaffer of Station Pizza is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into a 1,685 square foot, 20-seat restaurant. The new restaurant would be a Station Pizza with indoor dining, take-out and delivery service. The existing site is zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District, which allows only automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. Restaurants are allowed uses in the PCD-1, Planned Commercial Zoning District. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential use. 1.02 The property is legally described as follows: Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 194, files of the Registrar of Titles, except that part of said tract embraced within Registered Land Survey No. 1081, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 To accommodate the request, the following is requested: ➢A Comprehensive Plan Amendment from MDR, Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial (a new land use designation). 1.04 On November 13, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended denial of the requests. Vote: 8 Ayes and 0 Nays. 1.05 On December 3, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the requests. 1.06 On December 17, 2024, the City Council approved the requests. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The subject property is too small to accommodate all that is being proposed on the site. As proposed, with the number of variances being requested, the restaurant would be an overly intensive use for the site. Page 615 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-107 Page 2 2. The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is not compatible with the adjacent residential land uses. The variances proposed are significant. 3. The site is currently guided for Medium Density Residential land uses. This comprehensive plan designation has been in place since 1980. The site could be developed with up to four (4) residential units under the current comprehensive plan. 4. The site should be rezoned to match the adjacent zoning designation of PRD-3, Planned Residential District, so that the use of the site is consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan land use category. Given the small size and triangular shape of the property, variances would likely be required to get four (4) residential units on the site. 5. In 2022, the City Council denied a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to designate this site NN, Neighborhood Node, for a restaurant. Section 3. DENIAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, to deny the Comprehensive Plan Amendment based on the findings above. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on December 17, 2024. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) Page 616 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-107 Page 3 CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2024. _________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 617 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-107 APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AT 6016 VERNON AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01. Jake Schaffer of Station Pizza is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into a 1,685 square foot, 20-seat restaurant. The new restaurant would be a Station Pizza with indoor dining, take-out and delivery service. The existing site is zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District, which allows only automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. Restaurants are allowed uses in the PCD-1, Planned Commercial Zoning District. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential use. 1.02 The property is legally described as follows: Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 194, files of the Registrar of Titles, except that part of said tract embraced within Registered Land Survey No. 1081, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 To accommodate the request, the following is requested: ➢A Comprehensive Plan Amendment from MDR, Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial (a new land use designation). 1.04 On November 13, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended denial of the requests. Vote: 8 Ayes and 0 Nays. 1.05 On December 3, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the requests. 1.06 On December 17, 2024, the City Council approved the requests. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is more compatible with adjacent land uses than the previous gas station and automobile service station located on the site. The existing building would be used rather than tearing it down and replacing it. The proposal would be an improvement to the site compared to current conditions. Page 618 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-107 Page 2 2. The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a restaurant. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment would then be consistent with the existing commercial zoning on the site. 3. The proposed amendment would allow a re-development of a commercial property that would be an amenity serving the area. A restaurant would be a community gathering space for this neighborhood which does not have this type of use in the area. 4. With the requirement of the cedar fence located along the west and north lot lines and the landscaping proposed, the project would be screened from adjacent residential land uses to minimize impacts. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Comprehensive Plan Amendment as shown below, based on the findings above. Page 619 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-107 Page 3 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on December 17, 2024. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2024. _________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 620 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-108 DENIAL OF PRELIMINARY REZONING AND SITE PLAN WITH MULTIPLE VARIANCES FOR STATION PIZZA AT 6016 VERNON AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Jake Schaffer of Station Pizza is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into a 1,685 square foot, 20-seat restaurant. The new restaurant would be a Station Pizza with indoor dining, take-out and delivery service. The existing site is zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District, which allows only automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. Restaurants are allowed uses in the PCD-1, Planned Commercial Zoning District. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential use. 1.02 The property is legally described as follows: Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 194, files of the Registrar of Titles, except that part of said tract embraced within Registered Land Survey No. 1081, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 To accommodate the request, the following is requested: ➢A Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District 4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District 1, with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than 1 acre in size. ➢Site Plan Review with the following Variances: 1. A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. 2. A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. 3. Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. 1.04 On November 13, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended denial of the requests. Vote: 8 Ayes and 0 Nays. 1.05 On December 3, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the requests. 1.06 On December 17, 2024, the City Council denied the requests. Page 621 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-108 Page 2 Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal does not meet the Rezoning findings Per Section 36-216 of the City Code. specifically: a) The proposal is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. b) The site plan would be detrimental to properties given the large variances requested, lack of green space, setback and separation from residential uses, potential parking issues and vehicle maneuvering in and out of the site. c) Will result in an overly intensive land use. d) Does not conform to the provisions of the City Code. e) Does not “provide a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. 2. The Variance criteria has not been met. There are no practical difficulties that prohibit reasonable use of the property. 3. The practical difficulty is caused by the applicant’s desire for a restaurant that does not fit properly on the site to minimize impacts on adjacent properties. 4. PCD Zoning District minimum area for restaurants is 1 acre in size. Section 3. DENIAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, denies the Preliminary Rezoning to PCD-1 with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than one acre in size, and Site Plan Review with the following variances: 1. A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. 2. A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. 3. Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. Denial is based on the findings above. Page 622 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-108 Page 3 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on December 17, 2024. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2024. _________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 623 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-108 APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY REZONING AND SITE PLAN WITH MULTIPLE VARIANCES FOR STATION PIZZA AT 6016 VERNON AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Jake Schaffer of Station Pizza is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into a 1,685 square foot, 20-seat restaurant. The new restaurant would be a Station Pizza with indoor dining, take-out and delivery service. The existing site is zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District, which allows only automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. Restaurants are allowed uses in the PCD-1, Planned Commercial Zoning District. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential use. 1.02 The property is legally described as follows: Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 194, files of the Registrar of Titles, except that part of said tract embraced within Registered Land Survey No. 1081, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 To accommodate the request, the following is requested: ➢A Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District 4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District 1, with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than 1 acre in size. ➢Site Plan Review with the following Variances: 1. A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. 2. A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. 3. Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. 1.04 On November 13, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended denial of the requests. Vote: 8 Ayes and 0 Nays. 1.05 On December 3, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the requests. 1.06 On December 17, 2024, the City Council approved the requests. Page 624 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-108 Page 2 Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The re-zoning would be generally consistent with existing commercial zoning on the site. 2. The proposed variances are reasonable given the practical difficulties associated with the site including the triangular shape of the site, street frontage on two sides, and the lots small size. 3. The project would include a restoration of the existing building; the expansion area would the west, where the nearest adjacent building would be 105+/- feet away. 4. The proposed Cedar Fence and landscaping along the west and north lot lines would minimize impact on the adjacent residential use to the north and west. 5. The proposal would be an improvement over existing conditions and use of the site. 6. There are other restaurants in Edina on property that is Zoned PCD-1 and are less than one acre. Those include Convention Grill, Hello Pizza, Town Hall Station. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Preliminary Rezoning to PCD-1 with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than one acre in size, and Site Plan Review with the following variances: 1. A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. 2. A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. 3. Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. Approval is subject to the findings in Section 2 above, and the conditions below: 1. The Final Site Plans must be consistent with the Preliminary Site Plans dated October 22, 2024. 2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built. 3. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city engineer’s memo dated November 4, 2024. Page 625 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-108 Page 3 4. Approval of a Site Improvement Performance Agreement at Final approval, 5. Variances are subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Final Rezoning and Final Site Plan approval by City Council. 6. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. 7. Final Rezoning is contingent on the Metropolitan Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. 8. A cedar fence must be installed and maintained along the west and north lot line as proposed to provide screening from adjacent properties. 9. A boulevard-style sidewalk must be constructed along Vernon Avenue, as close to the property line as possible. Sidewalk must be 6 feet minimum width. 10. Hours of construction shall be limited to: Monday – Friday 7 A.M. to 7 P.M. Saturdays – 9A.M. to 5 P.M. Sundays and Holidays – No Work Allowed. 11. Hours of operation shall be determined at the time of final approvals and would be subject to any conditions established as part of a liquor license. 13. Noise from the site shall be subject to the city's noise regulations in accordance article II, division 5 of chapter 23. Page 626 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-108 Page 4 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on December 17, 2024. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2024. _________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 627 of 1086 Created: 2024-12-05 13:14:57 [EST] (Supp. No. 14, Update 2) Page 1 of 2 Sec. 36-608. Principal uses in PCD-1 subdistrict. The following are the principal uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict: (1) Antique shops. (2) Art galleries. (3) Art studios. (4) Bakeries, provided the rooms containing the preparation and baking process shall not have a gross floor area in excess of 2,500 square feet. (5) Barbershops. (6) Beauty parlors. (7) Bicycle stores, including rental, repair and sales. (8) Book and stationery stores. (9) Camera and photographic supply stores. (10) Candy and ice cream stores. (11) Clothes pressing and tailoring shops. (12) Clothing stores, not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. (13) Clubs, lodge halls and meeting rooms, offices and other facilities for nonprofit organizations, not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. (14) Coin and philatelic stores. (15) Day care. (16) Drug stores. (17) Dry cleaning establishments and laundries. (18) Employment agencies. (19) Financial institutions, but excluding drive-through facilities and pawnshops. (20) Florist shops. (21) Food, grocery, meat, fish, bakery and delicatessen stores. (22) Garden supply, tool and seed stores. (23) Gift shops. (24) Handball courts, racquetball courts and exercise and reducing salons. (25) Hardware stores. (26) Hobby shops, for the sale of goods to be assembled and used off the premises. (27) Household furnishings, fixtures and accessory stores, not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. (28) Interior decorating establishments. (29) Jewelry stores. Page 628 of 1086 Created: 2024-12-05 13:14:57 [EST] (Supp. No. 14, Update 2) Page 2 of 2 (30) Launderettes. (31) Leather goods stores. (32) Liquor stores, municipally owned, off-sale. (33) Locksmith shops. (34) Medical and dental clinics. (35) Music and video sales and rental stores. (36) Musical instrument stores and repair shops. (37) Newsstands. (38) Offices, including both business and professional. (39) Optical stores. (40) Paint and wallpaper stores, not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. (41) Personal apparel stores, not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. (42) Picture framing and picture stores. (43) Repair stores and "fix-it" shops which provide services for the repair of home, garden, yard and personal use appliances. (44) Restaurants and brewpubs, but excluding drive-ins and drive-through facilities, other than as allowed in section 36-1264(f). (45) Schools. (46) Secondhand stores, not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area, but excluding pawn shops. (47) Shoe sales or repair stores. (48) Sporting and camping goods stores, not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. (49) Tailor shops. (50) Tobacco shops. (51) Toy shops. (52) Travel bureaus and transportation ticket offices. (53) Variety, gift, notion and soft goods stores. (54) Vending machines which are coin- or card-operated, but excluding amusement devices. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.16(2); Ord. No. 2015-21, § 3, 11-4-2015) Page 629 of 1086 Better Together Edina 6016 Vernon Avenue, Station Pizza-Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances Project Report Page 630 of 1086 Sara SK AGREES 0 REPLIES 0 DISAGREES 0 Yes, please! CONTRIBUTIONS 209 Contributors 148 Visitors 431 I live with my wife and two young children on Kaymar Drive, less than 200 yards from t he project. We are very much in support of this project and the rezoning. It's a very uni que neighborhood node that will create walkability to a community gathering spot that d oesn't really exist in the northwest quadrant of the city. We are concerned about enviro nmental impact of a new business coming in that meets the requirements of the current zoning (auto body shop or car wash). We also don't agree with the city councils current agenda of pushing housing density in Edina. An asset like Station Pizzeria would creat e neighborhood charm, a new community gathering spot and a great use of an odd co mmercial parcel in Edina. Please approve! GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 03 October 24 Abbyheids Abby Heidemann, Countryside neighborhood. I’d LOVE to have this restaurant option b ikeable from our house! What a great neighborhood addition. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 03 October 24 Diana Geseking We fully support the plan to have a Station Pizza at this location. It will be a welcome a nd much needed addition to the neighborhood. The former repair shop did not fit the ne ighborhood and was too industrial. A spot where people can gather over food is the be st possible option, including over additional housing. We hope the city approves the pl ans! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 October 24 elaubignat AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 631 of 1086 My wife and I plus our two toddler children live on Merold Drive across Vernon Ave fro m 6016 Vernon. A restaurant such as Station Pizza is the ideal use of the site from a n eighborhood perspective (which ought to be the City's top priority). Countryside and sur rounding neighborhoods lack restaurants / commercial nodes within walking distance. A restaurant such as Station Pizza would be a positive neighorhood amenity. It would b e so much fun to walk there for dinner with our kids and hang out with other neighborh ood families. Furthermore, we are very concerned with other potential uses of the site, i ncluding if it were to be operated consistent with its current zoning for automotive whic h would be a detriment to the neighborhood. We are also concerned by the City's push for greater density and affordable housing, both of which would be detrimental to our si ngle family neighborhood. Informal polling of our neighbors suggests unanimous agree ment on this. It would be great if the City would consider what residents actually want i n its decision making on this property. Please allow Station Pizza to invest in our neigh borhood and turn this current blight into an amenity! This is exactly what our neighborhood needs to foster charm, community and walk abili ty which are sorely lacking in East Edina. The site has been a blight on Vernon since I was a child and it was a Sinclair station. I can’t imagine that a car wash or gas station or auto repair shop will bring value to our neighborhood as a community and we have n o need of any of those items with all of the services just a mile away on Vernon. Let’s g et moving on this and put the vacant land to good use while cleaning up the ugly Kevin Kees facade. Brooke Moss, Parkwood Knolls. I would love to see Station Pizza or another gathering place move into the Kevin Kees space. There are so few opportunities for community e ngagement on this side of Edina once you travel past Jerry’s. The area is full of familie s and residents of all ages that would benefit from some vibrancy on this stretch of Ver non. Station Pizza has created a welcoming gathering place at their Mtka Blvd location which has proven to be successful in bringing the community together regularly. It woul d be lovely to have a business where residents along this stretch of Vernon and surrou nding neighborhoods could stroll or bike to and from. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 October 24 Hugh AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 15 October 24 Elissa Bean AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 16 October 24 brookemoss AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 21 October 24 Jeff b gisselbeck Finally you people got this done.. this will be a good addition to the neighborhood. Tha nks for getting rid of the eye sore for the past 6 years. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 22 October 24 George Charles My family lives in Birchcrest and would welcome having a local lunch or dinner option l ess than 5 minutes from our home. This is an opportunity to bring the community toget her and provide a walkable option for many. Please support what the community desire s. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 22 October 24 Nate Morrison My wife and I often walk the neighborhood. This is a great project that will continue to add to the walkability of the neighborhood. We would love to see the addition of outdoor seating included in the design. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 632 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 24 October 24 bebrenners We live in the Bredesen neighborhood less than a mile from this proposed project. Thi s is a great project that will add walkability and community gathering in a completely ne w way for the area west of grandview/jerry's. When I think about the future of how this site/location is used I can think of no greater use of the space to improve and contribute positively to the neighborhood. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 25 October 24 Sam R. We live on Eden Prairie Rd., a Frisbee throw from the Kevin Kees property. We would li ke the property zoned residential as stipulated by the Comprehensive Plan. Non-chain pizza places come and go. Once zoned commercial, anything could locate itself on the property and we worry what that would do to our neighborhood and our property values . What concerns us about this particular project is 1) the paucity of parking which woul d inevitably lead to strangers parking on our street, 2) the outdoor patio which would cr eate unwelcome noise on peaceful summer nights, 3) the likelihood of a liquor licence which would exacerbate 1) and 2), and 4) the come and go traffic that would snarl traffi c on Vernon Ave. at dinnertime. We would like to keep the quiet residential vibe that att racted us here. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 26 October 24 Steven Begich We do not support the remodel of Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue int o the Station Pizza restaurant. We do not support rezoning of the property from PCD-4 to PCD-1. The neighborhood surrounding this property is a peaceful residential neighb orhood. On Eden Prairie Road there are parents pushing children in strollers, children r iding bicycles and skateboarding, elderly people out for their daily walk. The area is qui et with very little non neighborhood traffic or parking by people not living in the immedi ate area. Having a Pizza restaurant and delivery business would adversely change the character of the neighborhood. It would decrease the safety of all who use and live on Eden Prairie Road. It would increase the noise pollution due to the increase in traffic an d people coming and going from the restaurant. For these reasons we do not support t his Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Steven and Julie Begich AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 30 October 24 Addison Lewis Hi, my name is Jim Frey and my address is 5017 Oak Bend Lane in the Parkwood Kno lls area and I'm calling about the proposed Station Pizza operation at the site of the old Kevin Keys gas station or service station. I and my wife Mary are very much in favor of the proposed plan. There's a real Darth of restaurants and in the area and this would b e a nice addition as far as the walk ability. Yes, there is a fair amount of walking traffic and I think we'd benefit greatly from that and the fact that it has been sitting idle for yea rs, it's kind of an eyesore and a reminder of things. You know, we're not getting done, s o I am with Mary and I very strongly support this and would love to see it happen. Than k you. Transcribed by Edina Planning Staff on October 30, 2024 at 10:30 AM AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 30 October 24 peppermatthew I live close to this site and against this redevelopment because: - A rezoning to PCD1 o pens future use to just about anything. If the Station Pizza place doesn't last then the n ext restaurant would find it much easier to put in a 50-seat place serving alcohol until m idnight. - Even with additional parking the indoor seating makes this place significantly underparked. Patrons would quickly learn to avoid the Vernon danger by parking on Hi ghwood and Eden Prairie Road. - Vernon is one of the only non-highway spots in Edina that has a speed limit over 40, and rush hour gets very intense/fast on that straightawa y. In/out condensed to rush hour time would not be safe. I would enjoy more dinner opti ons on the west side too but this site is too small. And eight counter seats does not ma ke a neighborhood gathering spot. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 633 of 1086 We live in the condominium immediately to the west of the site. We've been down this r oad once before with the Planning Commission as a neighborhood concerned about th e effect of introducing a restaurant into the middle of the neighborhood. The last time th e conclusion was that a restaurant not compatible with the neighborhood and would ca use multiple problems. Among the problems identified were the lack of adequate parkin g on the site causing patrons to park on Eden Prairie Road much similar to the parking on Drew Ave in the vicinity of the Red Cow restaurant. Related to the parking problem was the interference with traffic on Vernon that would be created by vehicles coming an d going from the site. The odor from pizza cooking was identified also. One thing I was concerned about was the storage of waste food on the property. The site is approximat ely one block from Bresden Park. The denizens of the park would love to have a dump ster full of goodies to visit from time to time. Hours of operation were another issued ad dressed last time around along with the plans to serve alcohol on the premises. The rat her substantial number of variances required to fit the facility on the site was another c onsideration. The current comprehensive plan identifies multi unit housing as the desir ed use for the site. This is entirely compatible with the existing surroundings. The forme r use as an auto repair facility was a low volume use which had little impact on the neig hborhood. The proposed pizza parlor is a high volume use which would have substanti al impact on the neighborhood adversely affecting quality of live and home values for t hose of us living in the neighborhood. Even more problematic is that the change in zon ing would permit other commercial uses even less compatible as a matter of right. The ostensible purpose of zoning ordinance is to protect the residents of the community. Th e Planning Commission and the City Council would be abrogating their responsibilities to the citizens of Edina if they were to permit this change in zoning to go forward. I live on Highwood Drive, 5 houses up from the proposed redevelopment. I urge the cit y council and planning commission to vote against the proposed redevelopment. My m ain concerns are increased traffic on Highwood Drive and Eden Prairie Road, the poten tial for any commercial development in the future once the property is rezoned, and the late hours of operation - especially with a patio and alcohol license. While I would appr eciate a neighborhood gathering place, I do not think it's worth the commercial rezoning which would allow any future development. Thank you for your consideration. I reside on Eden Prairie Road several houses away from the proposed restaurant. I am opposed to this restaurant development plan on a small, oddly-shaped parcel that is 10 0% adjacent to residential dwellings. It is guided for multiple unit residential use in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal requires amending the Comprehensive Plan, creati ng a new commercial zone designation, granting setback variances from all sides, allo wing insufficient parking spaces, and sits on a busy County road that doesn’t allow ove r-flow parking. While there is a general desire to add dining sites to the west side of Edi na, this proposal requires too many compromises to be feasible without permanently h arming the character of the immediate neighborhood. Nancy Scherer GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 31 October 24 Jeff K AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 November 24 KristinH AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 November 24 Nancy Scherer AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 November 24 Hannah We live in the Bredesen Park neighborhood with two young kids, blocks from this locat ion. We are in full support of this restaurant! There is a huge void of restaurants and ba rs in this neighborhood, and we think this would be beneficial for the neighborhood. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 634 of 1086 My husband and I live on Eden Prairie Rd and are opposed to the redevelopment of Ke vin Kees property into a restaurant. One of the things I have learned from this process i s when a prospective buyer looks for a site to build a restaurant, they do a site analysis first . Starbucks and Baskin Robbins are examples of corporations who use this practic e. Included are: 1) parking 2) neighborhood 3) competition 4) space turnover 5) traffic a nd 6) zoning laws. The use of this land for Station House Pizza violates several of thes e considerations. Instead of any commercial use, I would suggest the city purchase thi s property as green space to go along with their many environmentally friendly initiative s. It would be a win/win as the owner could divest himself of this burden and the surrou nding residents would be happy and able to maintain their property values and quiet ne ighborhood. Also, the city could finally close out this constant agenda item at their meet ings. Elaine A. We live across Vernon from the Kees parcel, and while it's appealing on the surface to i magine a decent pizza alternative right across the street, on balance we can't support t he Station Pizza proposal. We worry primarily about restaurant traffic entering and leav ing 40mph Vernon. And those who gush about having a walkable amenity in the neigh borhood but live to the south would have to contend with crossing a busy thoroughfare that's uncontrolled to the east, or crossing at the Blake Road light only to navigate a bo ulevard on the Kees side without a sidewalk. We're also sensitive to the concerns of re sidents behind the Kees site, who worry about restaurant patrons parking on their stree ts. Frankly, the earlier proposal for a charity drop-off facility struck us as a great traffic- reasonable use for the parcel, with a five-year lease giving the city time to work out a fe asible housing use for the site. You rejected that idea for the wrong reasons; please rej ect this one for the right ones. We live across Vernon from the Kees parcel, and while it's appealing on the surface to i magine a decent pizza alternative right across the street, on balance we can't support t he Station Pizza proposal. We worry primarily about restaurant traffic entering and leav ing 40mph Vernon. And those who gush about having a walkable amenity in the neigh borhood but live to the south would have to contend with crossing a busy thoroughfare that's uncontrolled to the east, or crossing at the Blake Road light only to navigate a bo ulevard on the Kees side without a sidewalk. We're also sensitive to the concerns of re sidents behind the Kees site, who worry about restaurant patrons parking on their stree ts. Frankly, the earlier proposal for a charity drop-off facility struck us as a great traffic- reasonable use for the parcel, with a five-year lease giving the city time to work out a fe asible housing use for the site. You rejected that idea for the wrong reasons; please rej ect this one for the right ones. Hi, my name is Polly Kiesel and I live at the intersection of Vernon and Blake Rd. in the condominium building. I am opposed to the restaurant idea. I am opposed to any devel opment that increases noise and traffic in the area. The traffic noise from the Vernon/Bl ake intersection is extremely loud all day as it is. I would like to see the site made into a green space, (mini park), with more trees and bushes planted and benches. Or a neig hborhood dog park for smaller dogs. I definitely am against the rezoning. I feel this are a is developed enough. It is noisier at this location than it was at my many addresses in the inner-city. I moved here for more open space, nature and Bredesen Park. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 06 November 24 Elaine Arnold AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 November 24 Terry Brown AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 November 24 Terry Brown AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 November 24 Polly Kiesel AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 635 of 1086 Hi, My name is Polly Kiesel and I live at the intersection of Vernon and Blake Rd. in the condominium building. I am opposed to the restaurant idea. I am opposed to any devel opment that increases noise and traffic in the area. The traffic noise from the Vernon/Bl ake intersection is extremely loud all day as it is. I would like to see the site made into a green space, (mini park), with more trees and bushes planted and benches. Or a neig hborhood dog park for smaller dogs. I definitely am against the rezoning. I feel this are a is developed enough. It is noisier at this location than it was at my many addresses in the inner-city. I moved here for more open space, nature and Bredesen Park. As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community , I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and s tandards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 o f our municipal code. This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site sin ce it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads de mand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern. The code specifies that: 1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets. 2. When lot s border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume. 3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case h ere, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue. The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two d riveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standard s. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but tho se discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for goo d reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community. Additionally, a s Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on t his proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards. In summary, I opp ose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I re spectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefull y before advancing this proposal. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 November 24 Polly Kiesel AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 November 24 Polly Kiesel Hi, My name is Polly Kiesel and I live at the corner of Vernon and Blake Rd in the cond ominium building. I am very much against the restaurant idea. I strongly oppose the re- zoning. I oppose any development that would add more traffic and noise to the area. T he traffic noise is already extremely loud at this intersection. I would like to see the site used as a mini park with more trees, plantings and benches. Or a small neighborhood dog park. I moved here for more open space, nature and Bredesen Park. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 November 24 Cem Candir AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 636 of 1086 As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community , I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and s tandards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 o f our municipal code. This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site sin ce it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads de mand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern. The code specifies that: 1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets. 2. When lot s border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume. 3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case h ere, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue. The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two d riveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standard s. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but tho se discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for goo d reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community. Additionally, a s Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on t his proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards. In summary, I opp ose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I re spectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefull y before advancing this proposal. As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community , I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and s tandards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 o f our municipal code. This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site sin ce it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads de mand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern. The code specifies that: 1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets. 2. When lot s border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume. 3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case h ere, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue. The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two d riveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standard s. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but tho se discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for goo d reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community. Additionally, a s Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on t his proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards. In summary, I opp ose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I re spectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefull y before advancing this proposal. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 November 24 Cem Candir AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 November 24 Cem Candir AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 637 of 1086 As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community , I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and s tandards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 o f our municipal code. This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site sin ce it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads de mand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern. The code specifies that: 1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets. 2. When lot s border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume. 3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case h ere, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue. The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two d riveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standard s. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but tho se discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for goo d reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community. Additionally, a s Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on t his proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards. In summary, I opp ose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I re spectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefull y before advancing this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration. As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community , I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and s tandards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 o f our municipal code. This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site sin ce it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads de mand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern. The code specifies that: 1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets. 2. When lot s border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume. 3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case h ere, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue. The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two d riveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standard s. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but tho se discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for goo d reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community. Additionally, a s Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on t his proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards. In summary, I opp ose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I re spectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefull y before advancing this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration. Cem Can dir Email Submitted to Edina Staff on November 8 11:50AM GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 November 24 Cem Candir AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 November 24 MJ Lamon AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 638 of 1086 As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community , I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and s tandards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 o f our municipal code. This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site sin ce it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads de mand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern. The code specifies that: 1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets. 2. When lot s border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume. 3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case h ere, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue. The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two d riveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standard s. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but tho se discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for goo d reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community. Additionally, a s Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on t his proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards. In summary, I opp ose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I re spectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefull y before advancing this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration. Cem Can dir Email Submitted to Edina Staff on November 8 11:50AM Hi, I'm calling to give input on the 6016 Vernon Avenue and the request to add a new d evelopment proposal. I live at 5725, Blake Avenue or Blake Road, Sorry. My name is P olly Kiesel last name is spelled K. I. E. S. E. L. so, I live at the corner of Vernon and Bla ke Road in the condominium building, and I'm very much against the restaurant idea. I strongly oppose the rezoning. I'm really against any development that would add more traffic and noise to the area. I moved here to get away from traffic and noise, and I was really surprised at how loud it is here. It's already very loud, and I'd like to see the site u sed as a mini park with more tree plantings and benches or a neighborhood dog park f or small dogs. I moved here for open space nature and Bredesen Park and I feel like th e neighborhood has developed enough. Thank you very much. Bye. Bye. Transcribed by Planning Staff November 8, 2024 11:00 AM GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 November 24 MJ Lamon AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 November 24 Addison Lewis AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 November 24 Millers Our home is a 5-minute walk to 6016 Vernon Ave; we are very much in support of the p roposed expansion to the current building and the variances that are requested. It is a well-planned design. With only 20-seats in the restaurant, the size is perfect for a neig hborhood gathering spot. Being steps away from Bredesen Park and Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail, I perceive many will come on foot or bicycle. This area has been long ov erdue for a neighborhood restaurant! Laura Miller AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 639 of 1086 My husband and I live on Eden Prairie Road, two doors down from the Kee's site and a re opposed to the redevelopment plans for a restaurant there. Even though many citize ns want a restaurant in the western part of Edina, this site is not appropriate. And the q uestion that should really be asked is, "Do you want a restaurant on your block next to your house?" I doubt they would still think it was a good idea. The number of variances requested alone speak to the lack of suitability of the site and to the negative impact it would have on the neighborhood. This site is on Vernon Ave., an already very busy stre et with a bike path on the side of the proposed restaurant. It is not readily accessible as a "walk to" restaurant--and most people, going out to eat, drive to their destinations any way. With the very small parking lot proposed and no street parking in front of it, patron s would find it much easier and less hassle to get out of their cars on Eden Prairie Road and Highland. Adding cars on these streets would make it impossible for residents to p ark in front of their own residences--not to mention the increased traffic and noise they would need to contend with. (The three condominium buildings next door to the Kees s ite alone have 60+ apartments in them and need street parking for their guests and co mmercial and emergency services.) Please stay with Edina's comprehensive plan whic h designates this area for multiple unit residential use. This lot is not part of a commerc ial pod. If residential use does not work out, please turn it into a park or green space. T he residents who live next door to this proposed restaurant site do not want to live next door to a restaurant and suffer the very negative impact it will have on their lives and pr operty values. Joan and Leigh Johnson First I am not a resident living in the area of the proposed Station Pizza. My name is K athleen in the Concord neighborhood. I have watched one proposal after another come before planning and council on this parcel. There is a for sale sign now and owner want s to sell it. If that does not happen he also would no doubt like to sign a lease to get so me income coming in. All within his rights. Each proposal has been voted down by CC and CC and staff keep talking about residential on this parcel...but what is being done or can be done to change the zoning so that businesses are not wasting their time with these proposals? This is wasting everyone's time if all city wants is residential. The Stat ion Pizza proposal is a good one...minimum seating with mostly take away business. H ours reasonable... and owner/operator has a good track record. I think this one should be approved and stop wasting everyone's time here or city should rezone it if they can l egally do that to something they want. I have to wonder if owner does not have some ri ghts here? I hope planning can clear up some of my confusion if they can just rezone t his and only option would be residential? I say Station Pizza is best option yet and sho uld be approved. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 09 November 24 Joan Johnson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 10 November 24 Kathy AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 640 of 1086 Regarding the former Kevin Kees Site We are concerned residents that live on Eden P rairie Road and do not want to see a pizza restaurant or any other establishment at the former Keven Keys site. The neighbors have been saying this for 4 years. This site is n ot a pod as other areas of Edina with many businesses grouped together. It’s a one of a kind property. If Edina residents were asked if they would like a restaurant built this cl ose to their home we think the answer would be a resounding “No”. When people choo se to buy a home near a restaurant they know at the time what they are getting. When you’ve lived in an area without an existing restaurant nearby it’s not right to have one pl aced there when the rest of the area is totally residential. It is not the City of Edina or th e neighbors fault that the new owners paid too much for this small parcel of land. They simply did not do their due diligence. It should be returned to residential. If the site beco mes a restaurant, the parking on Eden Prairie Road will become a huge problem as th e parking is so limited at the site and parking on Vernon Ave would not be allowed. Thi s street is where our family and friends park when they visit us. How many times must we have to continue this fight? Please do not allow this property to be anything other th an housing. Bob and Mary Melander 6105 Eden Prairie Rd. #35 Steve Alexander, Countryside. This is a residential area, and a new restaurant should not be inflicted on local residents. I live a block away from the Keyes location, and any restaurant built there would bring extra traffic to an already busy section of Vernon, cre ate additional noise and create an overflow parking problem. In addition, Edina does n ot need another pizza restaurant, take-out or dine in. Forcing one into a residential neig hborhood benefits no one but the current land owner. The Keyes space should become residential property, which benefits everyone who already lives in the area and anyone who regularly drives on Vernon Avenue. Dan Arom, Eden Prairie Rd Resident. This project is less than 300 feet from my home. I am in favor of this proposal. It is very different than the previous restaurant proposal s ince there are only 8 counter seats available and one adjacent room with a table for 12 people. From my understanding and review of the architectural drawings, they are not planning on serving alcohol or planning a patio, so I don't foresee patrons staying at th e restaurant late into the night - primary activity would be takeout during lunch/dinner ti mes. This number of seats (total of 20) would not significantly increase adjacent neighb orhood parking with on-premise parking that can accomodate 21 cars. This appears to be a primarily to delivery and takeout operation and would remove an eyesore of a buil ding in disrepair. The existing Station Pizza location has been a well run restaurant for several years and I have little doubt they would be a good neighbor. Barb Bender. I live on Eden Prairie Road, within 1000 feet of the site, and I and oppose this plan. Since late 2021, the Planning Commission, City Council, Mayor, city staff and neighbors have spent countless hours and tax-payer dollars evaluating proposals from developers who are struggling to wedge a profitable business into a well-established re sidential neighborhood. Whether or not the developers performed due diligence prior to purchase of 6016 Vernon is debatable. The difficulty of mating this lot to a viable busin ess plan was foreseeable and should not be resolved by granting significant variances, rezoning, amending the Comprehensive Plan and upending long-term neighborhood e xpectations of medium-density housing. Home owners--relying on the character of a ne ighborhood--make substantial investments to purchase, improve and maintain their res idences. These investments must be made with confidence in the Comprehensive Plan . Thanks for your consideration. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 10 November 24 Bob Melander AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 11 November 24 Steve Alexander AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 11 November 24 Dan Arom AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 11 November 24 BarbB AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 641 of 1086 James Westin. I live on Garrison Lane within 1000 ft of the Town Hall Station Restaura nt on the East side of Edina, and I fully support this plan for the Kevin Kees site. We we nt through a similar situation a few years back when the owners of the Town Hall Statio n restaurant wanted to convert the old original gas station that was there into a restaur ant. There was pushback from some of the neighbors, but the majority of people in the neighborhood supported the proposal. Town Hall Station has been a welcome addition to our neighborhood. I would expect that The Station Pizza will also be a welcome addi tion to the neighborhood in west Edina. In an era where more people want things walka ble, there aren't many options for places to go in west Edina. This would give people on e of those options and enhance the neighborhood feel. The common denominator in all the previous proposals and debate around this site is cars - a lack of parking and an increase in traffic. I wish we could see a proposal for thi s spot that would not be a business so reliant on car traffic for its success. While others will argue this restaurant would increase foot traffic, and it may for those who live withi n a mile, with our MN weather and a lack of sidewalks all around the site, people will dr ive to it. The popular desire for a restaurant on this site underscores just how much put ting one there will inevitably increase the car traffic on the all-residential streets surroun ding it. It will definitely be a popular spot, and with its tiny size and unique shape, it will not have enough parking. Patrons will drive through our quiet, sidewalk-less streets, lo oking for places to park. Additionally, the pedestrian sidewalk connecting Highwood Dri ve and Eden Prairie Road would welcome alternative parking on the neighborhood stre ets. For this reason, we respectfully ask the city to consider how much a decision to ch ange the zoning of this site will affect the neighborhood directly surrounding it. Thank y ou, Sarah and Dave Irwin, 6025 Kaymar Drive We live in the Parkwood Manor Condos directly overlooking the Kevin Kees building an d are greatly opposed to any business that includes an expansion of the building, parki ng or hours of business. The Kevin Kees business brought in very little traffic and kept l imited hours (no evening hours) to be a good fit for the residential neighborhood they w ere in. This neighborhood is a quiet place to live and was chosen so by us for that very reason. If we had wanted to be in a walkability place for restaurants etc we would have chosen differently. (Those that want pizza are welcome to go down the road a short bit to Davannis to the East or Olives Fresh to the West) Not only would a restaurant bring i n more traffic but that will mean headlights coming right into our windows pulling in and out of the parking lot. It will mean more noise when the windows are open from both th e cars and the patrons and heaven forbid if they have any kind of outdoor music playin g. Our fear is if a restaurant is approved now, sooner or later there will be expansions and modification allowing liquor, longer hours, more seats...it will snowball and the quie t, quaint neighborhood we live in will be gone. Please do not allow this development to proceed to negatively affect our financial investments in our homes. We understand th at you are hearing from both sides being for and against the proposal but when I read a ll the comments for this development, they are from people who do not live right here n ext to the site like those of us on Eden Prairie Road or Kaymar. That certainly should te ll you something. And just maybe this process has been so challenging because it is n ot the right fit for this property. We would welcome another residential neighbor(s). Tha nk you for your consideration into this matter and please do your civic duty and vote ag ainst a restaurant where one doesn't belong. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 12 November 24 James AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 12 November 24 Sarah Irwin AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 12 November 24 Darlene M AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 642 of 1086 My name is Mary Kenealy-Bredice. I was born and raised in Edina. I currently live less than a block from the proposed site for Station Pizza on the former Kevin Keys propert y where we have lived for more than 20 years. A lot of research was completed last ye ar for a proposed restaurant by Mary Collins and Chris Davis. The result from the city managers (staff) was that it would not go forward. This proposal is much the same, but has evolved into an even bigger project requiring more variances. as well as rezoning. I strongly oppose the change to PCD-1. If this business fails, it leaves us open to all ki nds of businesses that we would not want in our neighborhood. All the variances neede d should be an indication of the lack of fit for this project. The issues surrounding traffic , noise, liquor and parking in the neighborhood haven't changed. They want use every l ast inch for the proposal. We have a great neighborhood and this would not be a good addition to our neighborhood or the senior residents that live right right next to it. Small children live directly across from the proposed site. The Edina school buses would not be able to pass during the winter due to snow build-up. We know this so no one parks o n the curve that connects Eden Prairie Road to Kaymar Drive. Both streets get heavy f oot traffic all day long with walkers, runners, and bikers. There are many children in the neighborhood. Added traffic would certainly be a safety factor. There has not been any direct contact with the neighbors regarding this proposal. Just another point to make is that the majority of people who were positive regarding the previous proposal, did not li ve in the neighborhood, but were called by the friends of the developers and asked to c omment. Some of the people who commented have moved or are currently looking to move. Please do not grant these variances or change the zoning to accept this propos al. Thank you. This is Rick Bredice and I live on Kaymar Drive, less than a block away from this site. I oppose this project for the same reasons that I opposed the project plan submitted two years ago to change the zoning and request property variances to accommodate a rest aurant. The concerns raised by residents and the recommendations of administrative s taff at that time have likely not changed. Having a commercial business on this site doe s not fit. Commercial activity would most likely take place on evenings and weekends. Parking and access are also important concerns due to the high volume of traffic on Ve rnon Avenue and the limited on street parking in the neighborhood. As we all learned, a zoning change opens the door to any number of business types if Station Pizza were to leave in the future. Ed Mathie, 32 year Edina resident. This property should probably never have been zon ed PCD-4. If this property had dropped out of the sky yesterday, the city would never c onclude it should be PCD-1. Some neighbors have good intentions in imagining a smal l restaurant, but PCD-1 opens the door to many things that have no business in that sp ot. The long list of variance requests, access issues, and neighbor resistance alone sh ould signal how poorly a PCD-1 resident is for the spot. I think the city should make it a ttractive for the current owner to rezone the property to PRD-3. The city must take som e financial responsibility for getting this parcel back into the master plan, but only base d on fair market values for the property, versus making the owners whole for an overly optimistic, above-value purchase. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 12 November 24 Kenealy-Bredice, Mary AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 12 November 24 Rick Bredice AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 13 November 24 SDM My husband and I live on Wellesley Place, off Vernon just west of this location. We wo uld love to see a restaurant option that is easily walkable from our home. We were disa ppointed when the previous proposal was voted down and are fully in support this alter native option. (And no, we are not friends or relatives of the developer or the owner as one person suggested.) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 13 November 24 Ed Mathie AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 643 of 1086 I live across the street from the proposed restaurant, and strongly oppose changing th e zoning to PCD-1. We are a family who stand to lose a lot if this site is redeveloped a s a restaurant: a safe place to raise a family, a place to work productively, a good retur n on our investment, and a beautiful neighborhood. The planning commission staff rep ort stated that “because of the significant variances requested, concern over parking, l ack of landscape screening, lack of green space, car and truck maneuvering on the sit e, staff believes the restaurant would be detrimental to surrounding properties.” Those f actors have not changed, though a new proposal for a restaurant is being considered. We ask Edina to adhere to its comprehensive plan, which provides guidance that resid ential areas should be developed in ways that “protect the integrity of existing neighbor hoods.” Hello, my name is Tammy Thomas and my address is 5908 Grove Street. I'm calling in support of the Station Pizza going in in the old Kevin keys location and building. I am in full support of this. I know that the owner that runs and owns the Station Pizzas. Minnet onka runs an excellent restaurant and I think it would be a great asset to the communit y to have this restaurant in our neighborhood, a great gathering spot and a very nice pl ace to go and socialize. Moving ahead with this I would give my full support in having t his go into our neighborhood. Thank you. Transcribed by City Staff 11/13/24 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 13 November 24 Tracy Pepper AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 13 November 24 Addison Lewis My name is Lucy Patch. My address is 6141 Blake Ridge Road, Edina MN. I am calling about the proposed Station Pizza, a 20-seat restaurant and my message is that I am o pposed to the proposed Station Pizza, 20 seat restaurant. I feel it is going to be an eye sore and cause traffic issues and other issues in all residential areas. I also feel the are a should be rezoned or whatever is necessary for the construction of residential homes . Townhomes, condos or apartments. Thank you. Transcribed by City Staff 11/13/24 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 13 November 24 Addison Lewis Hi, my name is Lisa Jahnke . My address is 5813 Olinger Road, Edina, MN and I am in favor of the Station Pizza going into the old Kevin Keys area. I think it would be of bene fit to everybody. And I think it's a great idea. So, I just wanted to let you know. Thank y ou. Bye. Transcribed by City Staff 11/13/24 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 13 November 24 Addison Lewis AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 13 November 24 Addison Lewis This is Gretchen Gray. I live at 6105 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, MN, and I'm calling abo ut the public hearing for the applicant Jack Shafer Station Pizza proposal, and I object t o it on the basis of the fact that there isn't space for that. There's not an adequate parki ng area, and I really object to this and I don't think that the request should be approved. Thank you. Transcribed by City Staff 11/13/24 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 644 of 1086 This is Ken Dragseth and I live at 6058 Blake Ridge Road, Edina, MN and am calling r egarding the Station Pizza proposal for the Key’s automotive site. I live across from the street from there. I strongly urge the Planning Commission and Council to support this proposal. Our community in this area needs something for our eating facilities. There is nothing in this part of town that's close. I think its time for the Planning Commission an d City Council to move forward with a positive thing for this area. I lived in this area for 24 years and have seen the transition from key automotive to the variety of proposals. This seems like an excellent proposal. I hope that the Planning Commission, and event ually the Council will approve it. Thank you. Transcribed by City Staff 11/13/24 Hi, my name's Andrew Gardner. I live on Merold Drive. I'm calling regarding the propos ed Station Pizza property on Vernon Avenue, which I'm in full support of. Um, I disagre e with any of the comments that suggest turning the property into a public park or some thing like that, which would require the city to either buy the property or the current own ers to donate it, which certainly seems unlikely. I think the highest and best use for the property is to make it into a tax revenue generating restaurant, which would be great to have in the neighborhood. Thanks. Bye. Transcribed by City Staff 11/14/24 Here we go again. Same song…Different verse This lot is already zoned as Medium D ensity RESIDENTIAL…since 1980 Why do we need to go through the process of a Co mprehensive Plan Amendment with multiple variances? Why do we have to develop a NEW Neighborhood Service designation --just to meet the needs of a commercial ente rprise that does not fit into the neighborhood and… May or may not succeed Vernon Av e was the original route for HWY 169 and at that time it was legitimate for a gas station to be built there. TIME HAS CHANGED the area. • Vernon is no longer a hwy. • Famili es have developed the area into a RESIDENTIAL community * Why is it incumbent on t he City of Edina to protect an owner from a bad purchase decision? We have all made mistakes in our lives. At a certain point, it is best to recognize the mistake, accept and own the consequences and move forward. In the words of the STAFF REPORT ON P. 7… MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MAY BE THE BEST LONG-TERM USE OF TH E PROPERTY. It is time to end this recurring debate and establish once and for all that this property needs to be designated ONLY for Medium Density Residential. THANK Y OU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION Pam Allen 6105 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, MN #15 Transcribed by City Staff 11/14/24 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 13 November 24 Addison Lewis AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 14 November 24 Addison Lewis AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 14 November 24 Addison Lewis AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 15 November 24 C.Morgan We are in favor of a pizza Station restaurant. ~Or a cute coffee shop that would serve coffee, cinnamon rolls, soups….. C.Morgan ~Highlands AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 645 of 1086 Hello, I had looked on the better together Edina development but didn't see any spot w here you could type anything in. So, I thought you could transcribe this. This is David Wilson; 5604 Heather Lane and I live about 2 blocks from the pizzeria that you're thinki ng about letting in Edina. I Really hope that you guys change the zoning on this that Ke vin Keys facility has been there for what is it? 50 years? 70 years and we need to do so mething different with it. If you look at this section of Edina, we are really in a food dese rt. The closest place is out on 169, which is quite a way or back to Jerry's. Both of whic h are not really walkable for anybody so really hope it goes through and we don't pay t oo much attention to the renters that live right next door versus homeowners that are liv ing in the area and paying taxes and have planted roots. I've been here for 27 years, s o anyway, hopefully it goes well, and we can keep moving on versus having a building that's been sitting for couple years with nothing happening at all whatsoever. So. We c an create some jobs and 1 of our neighbors that's going to own it that lives in Edina an d make some money off it and people can have pizza and everybody will be happy and the condos that are by the street. I've rode by bike past there several times. There's a l ot of cars that are on that street that runs parallel to Vernon Avenue. So that's just kind of par for the course for those condos and town houses, apartments in there. That it's going to be busy there. And that's part where they are living and they bought into when they moved into an apartment and it's right next to a garage. So all right. Good luck. Tr anscribed by City Staff 11/15/24 The decision of the Planning Commission to approve a pizza restaurant at the Keyes si te, irrespective of the opposition of the immediate neighbors that will be negatively impa cted by this restaurant, is alarming. Edina has a reputation of ignoring public comment s of its citizens and proceeding with preconceived plans. A perfunctory hearing of oppo sing views has met the requirements for public comments. Those comments were igno red. Instead, we received a patriarchal “don’t worry, you are going to love it after you g et used to it” justification for the approval. Perhaps the commission members should ac tually walk the property and see firsthand the inappropriateness of this location, tucked into an existing residential neighborhood. It would be encouraging to see the Edina City Council override the commission and focus on the needs of the people most impacted by this proposal, and not by some preconceived notion of what our neighborhood shoul d look like. We purchased homes in this residential neighborhood because we knew th e Comprehensive Plan designation was residential and as such, our lifestyle and home values would be protected. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 15 November 24 Addison Lewis AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 15 November 24 Jim1968 Why doesn’t Edina government just admit what they want the property for is low incom e or affordable housing instead of making people who try too put a business and spend money on a project or present plans that the city government does not want AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 15 November 24 Jim1968 I think the project should be approved because there is nothing down that way and I liv e nearby and would be nice too have someplace too walk too that serves good I know people say there are pizza places are neighing a few or or 3 or but the question I have there pizza and is very good compared too a few in the outside area of this project AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 17 November 24 Pam Allen AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 646 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 17 November 24 Kathy Don't bother asking a question as you won't get an answer. I don't think BTE is really e ven looked at by city staff. Just my opinion. Kathleen AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 17 November 24 Bdpatty Brian, Parkwood Knolls. 20+ year Edina resident. We are in favor of a restaurant or cof fee shop at the Kevin Keys site. We would love a walkable place to grab a bite or coffe e in our neighborhood! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 18 November 24 Michael Giovanis I live just down the road and think a pizzeria at this location would be a fantastic additio n to the neighborhood! It’s a convenient spot for families and residents nearby to grab a meal without needing to venture too far. Supporting local businesses like this not only enhances our community but also brings us together in shared spaces. I’m excited to s ee this project move forward! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 19 November 24 Liz Olson Hi, this is Paul Schmidt calling at 6033 Kaymar Drive. My wife and I are in support of th e Station Pizza restaurant at the current Kevin Kee’s automotive location under the foll owing conditions: There would be no vehicle access from Kaymar Drive or Eden Prairie Road and parking would not be allowed to drive on Kaymar Drive or Eden Prairie Road for patrons that would visit the restaurant. Behind the location is a very quiet neighborh ood that is full of young families with children and elderly individuals that walk on the str eets and the children are playing on the streets. Having access from either of these 2 s treets would greatly increase traffic and that would definitely curtail the existing culture, as it is, in the neighborhood. -Transcribed by City Staff (Voicemail received 11/17/24 at 4:48 pm) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 19 November 24 Liz Olson Hi, my name is Bruce Freeman. I'm at 6112 Eden Prairie Road, just down from 6016 V ernon Avenue. It was the Kevin Kee’s and now they want to make it a pizza place and I think it's great. I hope they go ahead with it and get some flexibility on what they can pu t there so they can make this work and put that space the good use. Glad to have a res taurant of some type in the neighborhood. Thank you. Bye. -Transcribed by City Staff ( Voicemail received 11/19/24 at 3:56 pm) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 19 November 24 Matt A My name is Matt and I live in the condos at 5725 Blake Road. I'm opposed to this pizza restaurant because the lot really doesn't have the space for it, it would bring undue traff ic, and would not fit into the residential character of the neighborhood that we love. Tha t the restaurant succeeds is unlikely, then we're left with a bigger, uglier building than w hat's there now. If they plan to serve alcohol, this is an even harder 'No' due to safety c oncerns. Turn it into a little park or something. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 647 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 20 November 24 nancyphinney Nancy Phinney, Countryside. I strongly support the pizza place - or some other cafe - in this area. 20 seats seems reasonable and honestly - offering take out and delivery wou ld be super convenient. I would love some place I could walk to and there is nothing in this area within walking distance. Thank you. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 20 November 24 Todd Kellogg Strongly Oppose proposal for New Pizza Restaurant..Best Use Would be New Zoning f or 5 or 6 units Maximum..Condos or Townhome..Traffic on Vernon now is already a Nig htmare especially during Morning and Evening Commutes..After 45 years in Edina Rea l Estate I have now seen pretty much it all..Current Owner Probably should have done his due diligence..2 years ago.. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 22 November 24 Liz Olson Hi, my name is Lisa Gardner and I live at 5821 Merold Drive. I am calling to voice my o pinion that I’m in favor of the pizza restaurant that is trying to happen at the Kevin Kee’s site. So, yes, I'm in 100% support and I think it would be a great addition for our neighb orhood. Thank you. (Voicemail transcribed by City Staff. Received 11/12/24 at 8:18pm) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 22 November 24 Liz Olson Hi, I'm calling to give input on the 6016 Vernon Avenue development proposal. I live at 5725 Blake Road. My name is Polly Kiesel. I live on the corner of Vernon and Blake Ro ad in the condominium building. I am very much against the restaurant idea. I strongly oppose the rezoning. I'm really against any development that would add more traffic an d noise to the area. I moved here to get away from traffic and noise, and I was really su rprised at how loud it is here. It's already very loud, and I'd like to see the site used as a mini park with more trees, plantings, and benches. Maybe even a neighborhood dog park for small dogs. I moved here for open space, nature, and Bredesen Park. I feel lik e the neighborhood is developed enough. Thank you very much. Bye. Bye. (Voicemail t ranscribed by City Staff. Received 11/8/24 at 10:22am) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 26 November 24 Liz Olson Hi, my name is Nancy Newcomb. I am the Board President over here at the condos loc ated at 5725 Blake Road S. This is about the Station Pizza they’re looking to put on Ver non Avenue here, or where Kee’s Auto used to be. We would love to have Station Pizz a over here. I've taken the consensus of all the residents here, and it would be a wond erful asset to have in a neighborhood. Thank you. (Voicemail transcribed by City Staff. Received 11/26/24 at 1:00 PM) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 01 December 24 Gayle K We live one house away from the 20 seat proposed pizza restaurant with take out, and will be directly affected by impacts of increased traffic, parking, lights, sounds and smel ls. It is concerning to think of all the many exceptions being considered to make this bu siness happen - change from housing in the Comprehensive Plan (since 1980), perma nent change to Commercial zoning which would allow for any future business use (incl uding marijuana), creation of a new zoning designation (Neighborhood Commercial) w hich could impact future use of contiguous spaces, and forgiveness to the required pro perty square footage of Edina restaurants. Please support housing on this site! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 648 of 1086 Hello City Planners My name is John Gester, I’m writing to the city because I’m in oppo sition of the Pizza Restaurant Idea . We live in Parkwood Manor Condo. With a few of my windows looking Directly at the proposed property.. The last thing this neighborhoo d needs are cars parking off Eden Prairie Road to go to the restaurant, with no sidewal ks on our road. It would be dangerous for us pedestrians with the added traffic in our n eighborhood… not to mention the traffic that flows down Vernon, has gotten worse ove r the 17 years we have lived here .. the proposed property would be best used for resid ential… Trust me if any of you city council members lived in our area you would be agai nst it … it will be a mess , like the Red Cow restaurant effecting the parking in the neig hborhood…. It’s an accident waiting to happen !! From the Parkwood Manor people ple ase DO NOT APPROVE THIS ,,, put residential property there … Thanks John. This site is guided Residential. Previous attempts to squeeze other uses onto it have fa iled because the site is too small to effectively handle a popular gathering space use. E ven this attempt which has 8 stools, and a conference room and no access from the ne ighborhood side will not achieve "gathering space status" because it is simply too small . It is completely surrounded and land locked by residential and it is 1.7 miles from the nearest commercial business. Just imagine your commute home at rush hour sitting on Vernon waiting behind the cars waiting to turn into to this tiny site to pick up their dinner . It works in Minnetonka because the site has a much better parking to seat ratio, and t he parking still flows up the side streets. Vote No. Dear Mayor Hovland and City Council members, My wife Gayle and I live at 6004 Kay mar Drive, within a lob wedge of the Kevin Keyes site. This site is currently proposed fo r a major zoning change and multiple variances to allow a new 20+ seat pizza restaura nt in an otherwise totally residential neighborhood that already has two other pizza rest aurants within two miles. Several Planning Commission members said in their Novemb er meeting that they thought this would be a "nice gathering site for our local neighborh ood" despite having 10+ nearby neighbors attend to urge them to make a no vote and having NO neighbors attend to request approval or even provide supporting comments on the meeting phone line. This tiny site, just 1/3 the size of the city's commercial zone requirement, is not suited to any commercial use nor the proposed new "Neighborhood Commercial" zoning status...too much traffic on Vernon, not enough site parking, and g uaranteed disruption to the current neighborhood tranquility. Worse yet, if/when this ent erprise would close or sell in the future, there's no limitation in this proposed new zonin g status on what type of commercial enterprise could then come in. The Planning Com mission appears to want to grant this request so they can get it off their plate and focus on other matters. Hearing them state in the November meeting that "change is always hard and that we'll likely get used to it over time" seemed to deliberately ignore our pub lic input that was made in their meeting. In response to the 2nd proposal (Green Drop), the Mayor stated that this site would NOT be a site for Commercial development. I ther efore implore the City Council to overrule the Planning Commission's recommendation and deny this proposal. Sincerely, Tom Kohlbry GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 01 December 24 Johnny AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 01 December 24 John B Wellborn AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 01 December 24 Tom Kohlbry AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 649 of 1086 Dear Mayor Hovland and City Council Members, My name is Rick Bredice and I live at 6020 Kaymar Drive. I oppose this rezoning request for the same reasons I opposed the rezoniing request that was submitted two years ago. Those of us opposed to the first re quest and the current request see the same potential for disruptions to traffic, parking a nd the rezoning impacts that resulted in the City Planning Commission's recommendati on to deny the first request and the City Commission's decision to vote against approvi ng the initial request. I am not aware of any significant differences between the first req uest and the current rezoning request. I don't believe that any restaurant should be per mitted in this neighborhood simply because it would be a "nice to have" addition. As a r esident of the neighborhood who would be directly impacted if this rezoning request is approved I believe that a restaurant or any future business that might use this location should be located in an area that is currently zoned for such businesses. Keep in mind too that there are no sidewalks in this neighborhood so walkability is not as easy as on e might think, especially in the wintertime. Thank you for hearing my concerns. I live on Highwood Dr, a few blocks away from the property, and am opposed to rezonin g. I love the idea of a local restaurant, but this is just not the spot. The traffic and parki ng would be too disruptive for the current neighbors in this residential neighborhood. I noticed many people commenting who are in favor of rezoning mention they would like a "gathering place"; however, the current plan is to make this a take out restaurant with seating only for up to 20. I don't believe this will offer enough room for the gathering pl ace people are hoping for. Anything bigger would be even more disruptive to the neigh bors currently living there. I agree that something needs to be done with the current bu ilding but a restaurant is not the answer. I live on 6000 Kaymer Dr &amp; my property is the closes to 6016 Vernon Avenue. No w this idea about a Pizzeria is the 3rd idea that has been presented in the past few yea rs. This seem to be the same thing as the first idea of the Westside Cafe but with differe nt food. I am concerned about the street parking that would happen near my home if th e Pizzeria would have in a dining room with seating. At the first meeting about the poss ibility of a Pizzeria I was told it would be "takeout only". Why did the original plans chan ge from, takeout only to dining room seating? I "do not support" the development of 601 6 Vernon Avenue to a pizzeria because I was told it would be takeout only &amp; now changes have been made. Thank You My wife and I reside at 6005 Eden Prairie Road, the property immediately to the west o f 6015 Vernon Ave. We oppose the requested change of zoning to permit the develop ment of that property as a pizza parlor. We went down this road not so long ago and th e Planning Commission and the City Council correctly rejected the previous proposal. The current owners created the situation by paying way too much for the property and not making their acquisition contingent on a zoning change. In my opinion, if the zoning is to be changed, it should be brought into line with the current Met Council Comprehen sive Plan, to wit, Multi-unit Residential zoning. Because of the shape and size of the sit e, developing the property with multi-unit residential housing is challenging. If the City were inclined to assist such development, they should consider making the right of way of the unopened portion of Eden Prairie Road to the immediate north of the property av ailable to the developer. The Council should adhere to GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 01 December 24 Rick Bredice AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 01 December 24 Randee AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 02 December 24 Greg Kalogerson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 02 December 24 Jeff K AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 650 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 02 December 24 Liz Olson Hello, my name is Lucy Peterson and I live at 5600 Highwood Drive. I want to leave my voice of opposition to the Station Pizzeria proposal at the end of this block on Vernon. I’ m concerned about traffic and potential expansion and alternative long-term alternative uses. I'm very much for just maintaining a residential permit for that area. Thank you v ery much. Bye. (Transcribed by City Staff. Received 12/1/24 at 9:58 AM) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 02 December 24 Tony Kamp Station Pizza will be a wonderful amenity for our neighborhood. I have talked with seve ral neighbors and nearly all are looking forward to having a place within walking distanc e to grab a bite to eat, and maybe a beer. A wonderful community builder. Additionally, because I can see this property from my home, I am grateful for the prospect of cleanin g up this long blighted property. Kind Regards, Tony Kamp 6036 Berne Circle AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 02 December 24 buildsmart Jeremie Kass, 6016 Kaymar Drive. We are opposed to the new Station Pizza plan. Wh en we had our community meeting it was only supposed to be a takeout and delivery s pot. This has changed to include seating and more parking spots in the lot. We are wor ried about increased truck traffic on Vernon Ave, Eden Prairie Rd, and Kaymar Dr from delivery drivers, food service deliveries. We are also worried about overflow traffic &a mp; parking from customers. Rezoning to PCD-1 will give limited options to the city to manage future uses. This space should be rezoned residential as guided by the compr ehensive plan. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 02 December 24 Stephen H Powless I am a 20 year resident of Edina, currently living in Parkwood Knolls. Vernon was a fou r lane road. It was converted to two lanes and two bike lanes. The bike lanes appear to be rarely used by people riding bikes. As it is now configured, there is no left turn lane except at traffic controlled intersections. Half of the drivers on Vernon drive ten miles pe r hour below the speed limit on clear, dry, sunny days. Adding a restaurant at 6016 Ver non Ave will make the area less safe because cars will pass turning vehicles on the rig ht, in the bike lane, when eastbound cars turn into the restaurant. Traffic westbound will have to slow further to allow right turning vehicles to turn into the restaurant. The impac t of these traffic changes on the broader public for the benefit of a developer is unjustifi able. Promises are made to lull a community into accepting a business that doesn't fit. There was a time I moved from Edina to Minneapolis. A new restaurant was built in tha t neighborhood that promised there would be no street parking issues in the neighborh ood around the restaurant because they would provide valet parking that would move c ars away from the neighboring streets. Why would a restaurant patron bother with valet parking when they can park a block away in front of someone's house? They don't care if a driveway is blocked, or if your previously quiet street is overrun by patrons just tryin g to pickup their pizza order or patronize a commercial establishment in a residential z oned neighborhood. I moved back to Edina, in part, because I was fed up with the den sity and activity. I wanted to live in a suburban, residential area. People wanting to walk to businesses can move to a city with that ability built in. It's unreasonable to think that a suburban, residential neighborhood should change its zoning laws to develop the fee l of a city because some residents would like to walk to a restaurant nearby their home or because a developer believed that they could acquire property and convince local g overnment to change the character of the neighborhood and zoning laws so that they c ould profit from the development. Edina was a first ring suburban community that had a desirable small town feel. The western part of the city seems to be about to lose that cu lture and join the over developed, high density east side with its attendant problems. Th e current residents most likely chose this community for its characteristics. It feels dece ptive to have the City Council change the culture against the wishes of the community affected. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 651 of 1086 Mary Kenealy-Bredice 6020 Kaymar Drive, Dear Mayor Hovland and city councill mem bers, I am a longtime Edina resident and have lived on Kaymar drive for 20 years. wou ld like to encourage you to vote no to rezoning the former Kevin Kee’s property to PCD 1 to allow for Station Pizza, but to continue to support returning the property to residenti al per the comprehensive plan. All the issues that city employees brought to light last y ear regarding the Westside Cafe are still major concerns. This proposal isn’t different in a positive way and yet at the planning commission meeting I attended, any concerns w ere discounted and did not seem to play into their discussion or recommendation. This site is not appropriate for a restaurant. It is the only commercial piece of property in the area. It is 100% surrounded by single homes and condos that are in very close proximi ty to the property in question. At the planning meeting I attended, the site was compare d to other commercial areas like Town Hall Station at Valley View and Wooddale, and t o Station Pizza, currently in Minnetonka. Those businesses are part of a larger comme rcial area and not right next door to homes, so very different from this site. Allowing the variances needed that are part of the plan will bring the restaurant even closer to its sur rounding neighbors. The added traffic, both on Vernon as well as on Eden Prairie Road and Kaymar Drive will still be a major problem. The traffic consultant on the video pres enting at the meeting was vague on his statistics and did not appear to include the issu es surrounding the in and out traffic created by the take-out option. The added traffic o n Vernon, particularly at rush hour, which is already very congested, will be a problem. The former Westside Cafe proposal that was voted down did not include take-a way as a major part of the plan, so the traffic surrounding this proposal, particularly in the even ing, when the traffic is already heavy, is more concerning. There will certainly be parkin g/extra traffic that spills over into our neighborhood. The neighborhood is filled with a lo t of children of all ages. More traffic present safety concerns. We also have multiple sc hool bus routes that include Eden Prairie Road and Kaymar Drive. Snow build-up in the winter makes parking and bus traffic even more difficult. At the meeting, the statement was made that this property has always been commercial, comparing this project to Ke vin Kee’s. The repair shop had very little in or out traffic. The hours of operation were d aytime only and none on the weekends. That makes this proposal extremely different. Another comment by one of the planning commission members said that no one has c ome forward to purchase the property for housing in 30 years. The property hasn’t bee n for sale, so that comment holds no significance, yet seemed to resound with the plan ning commission. The issues surrounding a liquor license and what dangers that brings to a neighborhood as well as hours of operation are also concerns and were not really addressed at the meeting. I fully support returning this property to residential and giving potential developers the variances needed to make this happen. Perhaps the city could offer some kind of incentive to make this a more desirable property for developers to cr eate housing. PLEASE VOTE NO! Thank you. My name is Krin Reid and I live at 6012 Eden Prairie Road, 4 houses down from the pr oposed Station Pizza development. I strongly urge you to vote NO to rezone and exten d setback variances . The reasons for turning down the previously proposed Westside Café development continue to pertain to this project. 1. The increased traffic and unsaf e entry and exit from the parking lot to Vernon Avenue is a recipe for problems. 2. Inad equate designated parking would likely spill overflow parking onto our currently quiet re sidential street. 3. The property is neither part of a business district nor a node and has previously been earmarked for residential zoning in our Comprehensive Plan. 4. The p roperty is not within a business district and does not constitute a node. Changing its zo ning would set a precedent that the council previously decided not to make. 5. If zoned for business use, this property could change hands in a way that would further change the character of our neighborhood and decrease the value of our home. I support rezon ing this property to residential. Given the 2024 property tax value of $655,000 this shou ld be feasible price for a developer to purchase and build a small multiunit housing proj ect that would align with the existing Comprehensive Plan. Thank you! GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 02 December 24 Kenealy-Bredice, Mary AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 02 December 24 Sam R. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 652 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 03 December 24 Todd B My name is Todd and I live 3 blocks away in the Countryside neighborhood. This resta urant is a fantastic idea. The community will highly benefit from a local walkable restau rant and a gathering place. Suggestions: Slow down the traffic on Vernon to 30 mph. It is used too often for people who are looking for a shortcut from 62 to 100. Make adequ ate turn lanes as there is a 6 foot wide sidewalk for walkers and bikers. Close the shop at 9PM. Open early for coffee and bagels. Thank you for your consideration! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 03 December 24 Efb888 My name is Emily Bierman and I live at 6112 Kaymar Drive. I strongly support the rezo ning of the former Kevin Kee's location to allow for the Station Pizza development. Havi ng young kids, I would love to have a restaurant within walking distance and think it wo uld be a wonderful amenity for the neighborhood. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 03 December 24 A1234 My name is Amanda and I live on Leslee Ln. I strongly support the proposal to build a Station Pizza at the former Kee's site. Having access to a family restaurant within walki ng distance would be a wonderful addition to the neighborhood. Many of the highest-va lued homes and most desirable neighborhoods in Edina and the surrounding area hav e restaurants and coffee shops near residential areas. Having moved to Edina from a neighborhood where my family could walk to a small grocery store, restaurant and park s, I am confident that having a pizza restaurant on Vernon will not drastically increase t raffic, put our children in danger, or create issues for the neighborhood. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 03 December 24 KellyE Please vote NO. Again. I live barely a block away from this proposed development, an d I want the city council, the planning commission and the Mayor to say NO to any non -residential building on this property. Edina already has in place long-term city plans an d zoning regulations for a reason: public safety, road safety and traffic flow, neighborho od density, appropriateness of developments according to the particular location’s existi ng zoning, setback requirements, etc.. I hope you will follow the existing, and I presum e well thought out guidelines. It appears as though the majority of neighbors that live in close proximity to this property spoke quite clearly about the prior development propos al a year or so ago to develop this property into a restaurant (overwhelmingly disappro ved) and the current Pizzeria proposal has practically all of the same issues. We have li terally dozens of food options within a 3 mile radius of Bredeson Park. We don’t need a pizzeria or café in the middle of our neighborhood, right next to our neighbor’s homes. Please build a single family residence on this parcel of land. Respectfully, Kelly Edward s Blake Ridge Rd Edina AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 03 December 24 Adam86 My name is Adam and I live on Kaymar Dr. I support the rezoning to the Station Pizza r estaurant. Our neighborhood could use something like it within walking distance. Perha ps it should come with some kind of restriction on delivery drivers using Eden Prairie R d. and Kaymar Dr. This is dragging on for way too long and the building is an eyesore. I f the council can’t agree on something, the town should buy the lot and convert it to a p ublic playground. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 653 of 1086 We support the development of a restaurant (Station Pizza) in the old Kevin Kees locat ion. We have lived on Killarney Lane for 15 years, and plan to for many more decades. This part of Edina is essentially a food desert with a large demand for walkable dining options, which is also evidenced by the developer's willingness to invest capital in our c ity and neighborhood. Allowing for a small, locally owned business to invest in our city, providing job opportunities and additional taxes should outweigh the small number of in dividuals in opposition. This is the best solution for this space. West Edina is a food desert and the Station Piz za solution is a great compromise that complies with all the concerns of previous prop osals - does not require overflow parking, limited seating, restricted hours - no compari son to the other Station Pizza in Hopkins. The public hearing was great example of wh y this needs to move forward. We all should invite thriving businesses into our commun ity to offset the high taxes that have been passed to home owners. The owner of Statio n is a member of this community, gives back to this community, listened to and will be a ccountable to the community. My name is Christin and we live on Leslee Lane just north of the site and are in favor o f the rezoning for the pizza restaurant. I would like to remind you of when The Waters s enior living home was being submitted to be built. Many of the neighbors were so worri ed about all of the traffic and the elderly in the parks and neighborhoods. Clearly these fears were deemed unfounded as The Waters was built and there haven’t been issues. The Planning Commission has done the traffic study and deemed that it won’t cause an issue. If people are worried about crime, a dilapidated abandoned building is a much bi gger magnet for vandalism and other such issues than a restaurant in a good city. As f ar as it becoming residential there hasn’t been a builder interested in buying it in over a year on the market. It’s clearly not conducive to that either. Also pinning it on a compr ehensive plan that was developed years before many of us current homeowners were even born seems a little far fetched. The city has changed and plans need to grow and change as well. Thank you. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 03 December 24 Jolene Lew AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 Lucas Hagness AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 ChristinPeterson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 Don K The former Keys Auto site has been vacant for a long time, and the current proposal ha s been modified at the request of the planning commission. I’m in support of adding thi s amenity to the area. If housing was a viable option for the site, developers would hav e jumped at the opportunity years ago. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 654 of 1086 This is Mary Thatcher calling. My address is 6005 Eden Prairie Rd. #110. I’m calling ab out the proposal to allow a sit down restaurant at the 6016 Vernon Avenue property. I u nderstand that there are involves some changes in governing documents that will enab le it. And I just wanted to say that I am not opposed to the proposal for the same reaso ns that I opposed it previously. I believe it would be likely to create traffic and parking p roblems on a neighborhood street. We have no sidewalks and pedestrians have to wal k on the street. In particular, it's hard to see when there are cars parked here and there and you're trying to stay out of the middle of the street. You're kind of popping in and ou t. I would think there is reasonable to anticipate some increase in traffic and property of the adjoining property with a restaurant on it. You know, there are children and old peo ple who walk regularly and have to deal with the problems of going in and out because of cars parked, trying to stay out of the middle. I just think that that a restaurant up ther e, particularly if it became popular, would mean an increase in the traffic and parking o n the adjacent 3 streets that have no sidewalks. And I do think it's a safety issue that s hould be carefully considered. Thank you for your time and attention. Goodbye. (Transc ribed by City Staff. Received 12/2/24 at 4:38 PM) We live less than a block from this proposed project and our front door and window on Vernon Ave. looks directly at the building and parking lot. Our concerns with the project are that it was originally take-out only and has now changed to indoor dining for 20. We fear this will lead to the parking lot being full with sit-down diners and pick-up vehicles, and the overflow take-out customers and delivery service vehicles will street-park direct ly in front of our house (which is less than a block away). The site simply isn't big enou gh for sit-down dining without having parking spillover in the neighborhood. We haven't heard specifically about alcohol sales, but this would be a problem for us as well. If you proceed with this project (which we would prefer you didn't in its current form), it is very important to maximize the parking in the lot itself. Even then, it probably won't be enou gh. Thank you, Lyle W GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 04 December 24 Liz Olson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 Lyle W AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 Ruby i live pretty close to the property and i would personally love to have a station pizza ther e! it’s very good food for a reasonable price, it would be convenient to have one in edin a rather than minnetonka! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 Julia Falbo I live about a mile away and I feel like there is a lack of family owned food businesses i n the area. This project is the best fit for the vacant area and would be a great spot to p ick up pizza or casual dine in. Please consider the best opportunity that is available. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 Leighton Chapuran My name is Leighton and I live near the Birchcrest area. I personally believe that addin g a new Station Pizza location to the city of Edina would be a great idea! Considering t he space has been vacant for so long, a business that is not only family owned but also local would be a great addition to Vernon. The Schaffer’s have my vote! VOTE YES TO STATION PIZZA! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 655 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 04 December 24 Gigi W My name is Gigi and I live right off of Gleason..and it is very true West Edina has lacke d food options for a while now and something new for that area would be great for all re sidents. I drive on Vernon just about everyday and I see no issue with their being a Sta tion right there because that building has been out of use for years and it would be grea t for take out and quick dine-in. Vote yes!! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 eloise anderson My name is Eloise and I live near Concord Elementary. I pass the lot for this potential establishment everyday, and I think Station Pizza would be a great restaurant to fill this empty space. Edina has a huge lack of food establishments and it would be something great and refreshing for all residents to enjoy. While reading some of these comments I noticed that some residents have wanted to put a children’s park in this lot. This is not a practical idea for all children, having a park next to a busy road is not safe. Whereas a restaurant would be a perfect choice not only because it’s super accessible for peopl e sense it’s on a busy street but also because it would provide a convenient dining opti on for families and individuals alike. Additionally, a restaurant like Station Pizza would c reate jobs and contribute to the local economy. I believe it would become a beloved sp ot for the community to gather and enjoy great food. Station Pizza has my vote!!!! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 04 December 24 Emmy Lewis Hello All, I have been an Edina resident 20+ years and have found the importance in s upporting local businesses and thus stimulating the local economy as well. Every day i drive past the empty lot and think about what it could be. I think adding a family owned pizza place would not only contribute strongly to the Edina community but also support the economy further while also providing a great place to eat. If there were to be afford able housing added (which if we look around it Edina it’s often) we see much more traff ic and less sense of community. I think that adding this restaurant would do great thing s. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 December 24 Samuel R. Hello. Our family lives on Eden Prairie Rd., just behind the Kevin Kee's site. The introd uction of a business with after-hours traffic will change the currently tranquil atmospher e of our neighborhood and our lives. If the business is successful, there will be overflo w traffic and noise on our street late into the evening. If the business is unsuccessful, t he next business could have bigger plans - liquor license, outdoor patio overlooking our yard, second-story dining. Please respect the Comprehensive Plan for this site and zo ne residential. Please value our quality of life over another convenient place to get pizz a. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 December 24 BJohn We live in the Birchcrest neighborhood. The food options in West Edina are very limite d and this new addition would be very welcome. This plan seems like it has a minimal i mpact on the existing lot and surrounding neighborhood. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 December 24 Liz Olson Hi, my name is Erica Campbell. I reside at 5201 Windsor Avenue in Edina and I'd just li ke to tell you that I'm in support of the variance for the proposal for Station Pizza on Ver non Avenue. It feels like it is the right thing to do for our community. I don't have any co ncerns about traffic. I believe in the study that has shown it is not going to make further changes. I'm really happy that this proposal is moving forward. Bye bye. (Voicemail tra nscribed by City Staff. Received 12/4/24 at 12:02PM) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 656 of 1086 Hi, my name is Gretchen Moore, and I'm providing feedback for the Planning Commissi on about the proposed Station Pizzeria project. I live in the Morningside neighborhood on Alden Drive in Edina, and have lived there since 2006. I think it's a wonderful idea to put a family-owned pizzeria there. The neighborhood will benefit from that in a way that is much better than an auto body shop has ever been. It will make the West side of Edi na more walkable for a family eating establishment. And I think it will be a wonderful ad dition to the neighborhood. Thank you. (Voicemail transcribed by City Staff. Received 1 2/5/24 at 8:10AM) Trojan horse for weed sales. Changing zoning to PCD-1 for the restaurant would put it i n the same classification as the Cannabis zoning. If you were worried about doors sla mming and traffic on Vernon, how about people smoking pot in the parking lot after the y made their purchase? Then proceeding on Vernon under the influence. The police w on’t be able to stop it, and the condos on Eden Prairie Rd will be able to smell it. I was i n favor of pizza, but would rather have it sit vacant for eternity than have a weed shop. This would severely impact property values. This was glossed over at the city council meeting the other night. Hello! I live on Vernon Ave and I think that a Station Pizzeria on this lot would bring ton s of livelihood to the area. First, Edina lacks food establishments where customers can actually sit down and eat great food like pizza, that isn’t all the way to 50th and France. It is so nice to think of a restaurant where the residents nearby can take a short walk to and eat amazing food! Second, Station Pizzeria is successful family owned business th at cares deeply for their customers. As a frequent customer myself their services our o utstanding and incredibly welcoming. Lastly, I drive by the old lot every single day and I always wonder what could replace it. Not only has the old lot been there untouched for a long time, but it diminishes the ambiance of the area. This restaurant is a great idea because it will create an upbeat area that people from the neighborhood can enjoy!!!! Hello, my name is Lee Azar and I live on Highwood Drive, a few houses from 6016 Ver non Ave. I fully support the rezoning of this site to allow for Station Pizza, the variances proposed are NOT unreasonable or invasive. I believe this small-scale Edina family-ow ned business is a great solution for this site. The size and scope of the pizzeria propos al is reasonable and would be a great fit and welcome addition to our neighborhood. W e are not talking about huge crowds, massive extra cars and trucks to this site! It is as proposed, a small 20 customer spot for neighbors and fellow Edina kids and families to support. Lastly, I am not in favor of Medium Density residential for this site. Please vote to approve this project. Thank you. Lee Azar GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 05 December 24 Liz Olson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 December 24 Concerned Citizen 9 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 December 24 Amelia R AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 December 24 Brett Petrusek Our family is super excited about the possibly of Station Pizza coming to Edina. The Mi nnetonka location is excellent. It's the perfect solution for the old station on Vernon (an eye sore) and a great location, it's a family owned business with exceptional customer service - it would be a welcomed addition to the neighborhood. Please approve this pro ject! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 December 24 Lee A AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 657 of 1086 I strongly support Station Pizzeria moving into the old Kees Auto site! Remember, busi nesses help lower our taxes as residents. I also welcome an Edina family business that will employ Edina residents. With regard to the comment about this site being a future marijuana dispensary, I will quote from the Edina City Council newsletter we all receive d in the mail today, " the zoning ordinance amendment requires cannabis retailers to lo cate in the same districts as tobacco and liquor stores", therefore it can't happen at this site. I live in the Melody Lake neighborhood, about 1 mile from the proposed site. Station Pi zza would be an excellent addition to the area. It addresses the current shortage of rest aurants in West Edina, offers a gathering place for our community, and replaces the ey esore currently occupying the space. After seeing many proposals come and go for this site, an excellent option is in front of us. Much thought has been put into the proposal, and I strongly encourage the Council to support this excellent addition to our communit y. Yeah, my name is Cort Lundeen and I live in the Chowen park neighborhood. I'm com menting on the Station Pizzeria project. I have lived in the area of for 13 years and kno w the owners of Station Pizza, and have visited their other restaurant. I feel it would be a great addition to the neighborhood and the West side of Edina. I don't think any of the traffic issues or sidewalk issues would be a big deal to bring this local community busin ess into Edina, as the owner lives in Edina and has been a great community member. Thank you. (voicemail transcribed by City Staff. Received 12/5/24 at 3:00PM) My husband and I live at 6005 Eden Prairie Rd Unit 109. I have read most of the comm ents on the BTE page and watched both the Planning Commission and City Council m eetings in regard to the Kevin Kees property. Many of those who support Station Pizza have mentioned it as a “gathering place.” A gathering place as I see it, is somewhere y ou can talk, spend time and linger over a drink or snack. Edina is already rich in gatheri ng places. When we have company, we pack a lunch and find a picnic table at one of t he many parks. The children are entertained by playground equipment, ball fields and other children they meet there. When the weather changes, other indoor areas are ava ilable. There are no time constraints. Station Pizza will be a business and their main go al is to make money. The more pizza they sell, the higher their profits. It’s much better t o sell 40 slices of pizza in 2 hours than 10 slices and have people milling around for 2 hours. It’s about profitability for any business which goes on this site. The interest of a gathering place will fade like the seasons. Residential use will be more long standing a nd a much better investment of this property. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 05 December 24 GG AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 05 December 24 Laura123 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Liz Olson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Elaine Arnold AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Heidi M My name is Heidi Moon and I live at 6009 Leslee Lane, a few blocks north of this site. I fully support the idea of having a restaurant and gathering place that is walkable for our neighborhood. It would be a fantastic addition to the neighborhood and would increase our community bond by providing a gathering place, be an employer for our local youth and being the only dining option in walking distance for our neighborhood- something much needed and good for our health and the environment. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 658 of 1086 As a resident living less than two blocks north of the proposed Station Pizza location a nd a parent of two young children, I fully support this project. A pizzeria would be a wel come addition to the neighborhood, providing a convenient dining option for families an d fostering a stronger sense of community. The current use of the property as an auto r epair shop is outdated, and the redevelopment into a residential property is obviously s omething that doesn’t make financial sense or a developer would have been on it years ago. This business has the potential to create a vibrant, family-oriented gathering spac e while promoting local economic growth. By prioritizing take-out and delivery, the plan minimizes traffic and parking concerns, addressing the common worries about new dev elopments in residential areas. I live in the Chowen Park neighborhood and I've lived in Edina since 2007. As a former owner, who was forced to open their business in Minneapolis (boo) because Edina's liq uor laws didn't allow distilleries and cocktails rooms at the time, I fully support any busi ness to open in Edina. If these people want to open a pizza place - let them. We should be supporting small business owners and the tax dollars they bring to the community. If I could go back in time to 2014, 2015, I would've rallied Edina to change their laws, ope ned my business in Edina and my business would probably still be open, but it's not. W e have a family with two small kids and we enjoy eating out and having nice establishm ents in Edina to be patrons of. I like to keep money in the local community and support those business owners. Are people worried about traffic, parking? Sure, should they be ? No. I live very close to Pizzeria Lola and Gia and we have never had issues with peo ple parking and being loud near our homes and I've lived in my home since 2007. They just opened a new nail salon near our house and I will be happy to give them my busin ess as well. I hope the business is able to open and I can't wait to bring my family there . Best of luck to the business owners. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 06 December 24 Ctbevan AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Jeff Doom I have been an Edina resident since 2007. I live in the Highlands neighborhood which i s close to the site. I think this would be a great addition to our part of Edina. I would enj oy walking up with my family to get a pizza and ice cream. I would enjoy the opportunit y for takeout as well. I do not think this would be disruptive. I think it would definitely ad d value to the community. Please approve. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Jim Gaasedelen We would enjoy having a new restaurant in the neighborhood. We hope this can be ap proved. Jim and Allison Gaasedelen AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 danielcragg I think this is a fantastic project. I hope we don't lose out again to the knee jerk NIMBYs . AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Nikki AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 659 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 06 December 24 jenstern I live in the Countryside neighborhood and think this would be a fantastic addition to th e area. We currently have zero restaurants we can walk to or easily bike to and would l ove for this site to become a restaurant where we can gather or easily grab something to go. West Edina needs local food options!! It is desperately missing from our neighbo rhood. We are a restaurant desert right now!!! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Mphansen Great idea. I live within blocks of this location, and (for the 2nd time!) please approve t his location for a neighborhood gathering spot with great food. It's exactly what this nei ghborhood needs. To make this happen, get creative with parking and zoning and give West Edina the same consideration as you do for East Edina. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Penelope Purdum I would welcome a restaurant at this location. I was sad when the last opportunity did n ot pass. People are looking for more of a small community feeling and places of this na ture provide that. I’m sure the hours will be reasonable so the neighbors won’t be bothe red by noise. The kids in the area will like it. It will provide employment- perhaps for hig h school kids. I imagine smell is a concern but I never smell Davannis when I am arou nd that area. I hope there will be some outdoor seating. Lastly, it is very similar to what they did with the gas station at the cross section of Wooddale and Valley view. People l ove that and it is right in the middle of a neighborhood. Best of luck! Penelope AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Doug Doebbert I have lived in the Melody Lake neighborhood for 20 years. Station Pizza should be dev eloped. It would be a nice, low-profile restaurant that, in today's digital and online envir onment, would serve to bring the community together. And come on . who wouldn't wa nt a charming pie shop in their neighborhood? Let's do this! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Melanie Reiland Would prefer a coffee shop/bakery, but very supportive of rezoning to food establishme nt AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Cacky Our family lives in the Highlands neighborhood and love the idea of Pizza Station. 4 vot es for a family dining/take out versus more housing! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 MelanieBB We live in the Todd Park neighborhood and would love to see this restaurant added to Edina at the proposed location! We fully support it! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 660 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 06 December 24 Kris Fielding I support a restaurant 100%!!! I know some of the neighbors have resisted but they will quickly change their minds when they see the restaurant as a fun addition to the neigh borhood! Please let me know if there's other ways I can support this project. Thank you ----Kris Fielding AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Amy Gisslen My family (husband, two children and I) live in the neighborhood behind this property w here Kevin Kees previously existed. We are in full support of the proposed changes. T his business opens up an opportunity for busy families like ours to get a meal within wa lking distance which can be a challenge. It’s time for some change and I think the curre nt proposal is an appropriate step in the right direction. I believe it will serve the comm unity well. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 JDS Judy Straub Parkwood Knolls: This sad empty building has been an eyesore for far too long. It would be wonderful to be able to walk over and pick up pizza for dinner, or walk over with neighbors and enjoy dining in. It seems everything else in Edina gets approv ed, it's time to approve/rezone this site so people may enjoy it! I fully approve of this pr oject, it will be a great addition to the neighborhood. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Sandraleed Sandra Davis here and I live on Harold Woods Lane in Parkwood Knolls. I have long b een a proponent of having something close by that we could walk or bike to. I like Stati on Pizza and this is a great option. This is the right kind of zoning for this property and i t supports both small business and the community. I am all for it. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Gardner Family We live on Merold Drive and we are in full support of having Station Pizza joining the n eighborhood. Please approve this restaurant- it would be a welcome addition! Lisa and Anj Gardner AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Tim Coats We live on Merritt Circle, close by to the proposed development at 6016 Vernon. We su pport the development. It's sized so as not to produce undue distruption to the neighbor hood and we like the idea of having a pizza restaurant we could walk to. Tim &amp; MJ Coats AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 David Madrigal We live on Schaefer rd and would be very happy to have a pizza restaurant walking dis tance from our home. We support the development. It's sized so as not to produce und ue disruption to the neighborhood … it will actually add value to our neighborhood and make it more appealing. Madrigal family AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 661 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 06 December 24 John Wanninger AGREES 0 06 December 24 JLS This would be such a wonderful addition to the community. My biggest issue with Edina is that it is not walkable for people in that neighborhood. This would finally bring a famil y place we could walk and bike to. We live 2-3 blocks away and I think it would be great ! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Lindsay Sorem We support this pizza place. We live on the west side and would love to have a commu nity place to walk to. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 LDiebold I support Jake Schaffer’s proposal to open a small 20-seat restaurant in the former Kev in Kee’s Auto Shop location at 6016 Vernon. As a resident living close to Vernon just 0. 3 miles from this site, I believe this project will be a positive addition to our neighborho od. This scaled-back concept addresses many of the concerns previously raised, and it represents an excellent opportunity to revitalize the space with a community-oriented e stablishment. A small, locally owned restaurant will enhance the area and provide a we lcoming spot for neighbors to gather. I encourage the City Council to follow the recomm endations of the City Staff and Planning Commission by approving the rezoning reques t. This project will enrich our community and be a valuable asset to the Vernon corridor. Lissa Diebold Glengarry Pkwy Highlands AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Don Quinn We are in full support of the restaurant and would love the city council's support. Quinn Family Fox Meadow AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Tom AGREES 0 07 December 24 Tammy Tomoson Why are we still talking about this? Let’s get this done. It would be a wonderful addition to the neighborhood and the Edina community. Tammy T AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 REPLIES 0 DISAGREES 0 We would love to have a small pizza shop in walking distance! Please make it happen! REPLIES 0 DISAGREES 0 There is zero reason to obstruct this proposal. Please get it done. Page 662 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 07 December 24 Alex Weicherding This project is what our neighborhood has been longing for; more walkable restaurant choices, and updates a long overdue eyesore. Get it done! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Timothy Grimsrud Tim Grimsrud. Parkwood Knolls resident. This project would be an excellent addition to the neighborhood. Very much in favor of this. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Amy Perkins, APRN, We are in full support of this proposal, as it would support a local small business as we ll as green initiatives by promoting walkability and shorter drives. CNP AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Katie Kloos (Katie Kloos - Countryside neighborhood) This location is a 15 minute walk from our ho me. I support this proposal, which seems appropriate for the site. This lot has been an eyesore for years - it’s time to move forward. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Annie Annie Tropple, Birchcrest. I fully support and would be excited to have another restaura nt option in Edina, owned by one of our neighbors. What a win-win. Great food (love th e existing Station Pizza) and supporting our neighbors and friends. I hope this goes thr ough! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Lisa Jahnke Hi I am Lisa J and I live on Olinger Road. Our family is in favor of the new Station Pizza . We are excited to have a restaurant so close to us! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Lori MacLachlan Lori M, Parkwood Knolls. We are in support of this proposal. This would be great for th e area and an excellent use of the space. Neighborhood restaurant owned by a neighb or - win/win. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 663 of 1086 We Support for Station Pizza in Edina As a proud member of the Edina community, I’m thrilled about the possibility of Station Pizza opening its doors in our neighborhood. Loc al businesses like Station Pizza bring more than just great food—they create spaces fo r families, friends, and neighbors to gather, connect, and build community. Station Pizz a’s commitment to high-quality ingredients and a welcoming atmosphere aligns perfectl y with the values that make Edina such a special place to live. This project has the pote ntial to not only enhance our dining scene but also contribute to the local economy by s upporting jobs and fostering a vibrant, walkable neighborhood. Let’s show our support f or Station Pizza and the positive impact it will undoubtedly have on our community. We can’t wait to welcome them to Edina! Jason Stockwell AGREES 0 Spike AGREES 0 REPLIES 0 DISAGREES 0 Is this even a question? I will have this place on speed dial! Large pepperoni please. REPLIES 0 DISAGREES 0 Stockwell family highlands We Support this 100% Thank you GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 07 December 24 JenHagness AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Lindsay Dubbeldee Lindsay Dubbeldee, View Lane. I am in full support of the proposed plan. The lot has b een underutilized for way too long and it’s time we make it into something the neighbor hood can enjoy. It’s 10 blocks from our home, and it would amazing to walk there and p ick up food on a Friday night. Pizza, sandwiches, maybe ice cream for the kids? We ar e excited to see this plan come to life! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 nancyphinney Nancy P - I live near Bredesen Park and would LOVE a place we could walk to for dinn er! The current building is an eye sore and sitting empty does nothing for our communit y. Bring us something we can all enjoy! Love that we can walk to this!! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Tracey Hester We support this project for additional amenities to add to quality of life for our neighbor hood. The Hester Family (Highlands Neighborhood) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Nick Jude Our family is in full support of this plan to convert into a pizza restaurant. We are neigh bors in Parkwood Knolls - we think this project improves the area and provides a need ed food option. The current situation of the property is an eye sore and we look forward to development. Nick Jude 5117 Scriver Rd. Edina AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 664 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 07 December 24 Mark TS This pizza station sounds like a good solution. Most traffic will be in and out quickly, an d they’ll provide an excellent service to the surrounding area. Anything is better than a n abandoned auto repair shop. Let’s use this space to enhance the neighborhood. Res taurants, locally owned, enhance neighborhoods. I support this Option. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 degrood Michaelanne d., Parkwood Knolls. We are in support of this proposal. This would be gr eat for the area and an excellent use of the space. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Joanne We live at 6236 knoll drive Brent and Joanne Anderson. We are in favor of the pizza pl ace. Wish it was a burger place cause we have one already by Londonderry and 169 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Laurie Kuyath My name is Laurie Kuyath. I live on Jeffrey Lane behind the Kevin Keys property. We a re a family of three. I support this smaller-sized pizza restaurant 100%. It would be a gr eat improvement to the property and offer a family-friendly place to meet on the west si de of Edina. Thank you for your consideration. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Pam Allen I am very interested in the comments recently submitted regarding the Kees site. The b iggest curiosity to me is that the proponents of this pizza place do not live in the immedi ate area. It DOES make a difference. Of particular interest is the opinion that a person would have to go to 50th &amp; France to find a place to gather. Davanni's and Olives Pizza are within 2 miles of this site. Both walkable and bikeable. I am concerned about the noise and safety of trucks delivering ingredients at odd hours in our quiet neighborh ood. Our kids will be at risk from the traffic on Vernon, and from the egress and entranc e to the pizza place. There is a better solution that would not adversely affect the imme diate neighbors. If it was being proposed in Birchcrest or Highlands or down Olinger...w here so many of the proponents live, that would be fine if it with me. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Susan Larson After reading the comments for, I am surprised that none of them show any concern for those living across the street or next door to the site. I would love to walk to Highlands, Parkwood Knolls or Indian Hills to have pizza but somehow I don’t believe the people w ho live there would be nearly as excited. Imagine what will happen to the property valu e of the houses directly across the street or next door. Also, all these people who say t hey are going to walk or bike there will soon tire of that once winter comes which mean s more CARS! So definitely NO! Susan Larson 6105 Eden Prairie Rd #17 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 665 of 1086 Roger Roe, and his wife, Paula, who currently live in Whitehall (4 yrs) and previously in Parkwood Knolls (20 yrs) are adamantly opposed to this pizza restaurant proposal, pri marily because the site is so small adequate parking on the property will be impossible. This necessarily means parking will spill over onto Eden Prairie Rd where there’s barel y enough off street parking now for residents and their guests. Inadequate parking mea ns unsafe parking as well as increased walking and driving hazards. Someone’s trying to force a square peg into a round hole by suggesting this tiny space can support a co mmercial establishment with all its attendant needs: Delivery of product issues, sanitati on issues, noise issues, intrusion into a quiet residential neighborhood issues. We, the immediate neighbors most affected negatively by the prospect of this proposal don’t wa nt it and surely don’t need it, much less do they deserve it. City Council, My name is Darlene Munson, and my husband and I own unit 210 in 6005 Eden Prairie Road, the condo building directly to the west of the Kees site. Our unit per sonally overlooks this site so we are very invested in what happens to this site. The res idents here have expressed concerns about people parking on Eden Prairie Road (hav e a lot of elderly and young children in the neighborhood) and walking down the north pathway to get to the restaurant, but actually the most direct way to access the propose d restaurant is by cutting through our side yard. Our side yard is for our residents to enj oy conversations with their neighbors. And we do not want individuals walking through the yard late into the evening to return to their cars. Concerned about the additional noi se from car doors, cars running (delivery vehicles) headlights shining into our bedroom and more. I never heard the number of employees and where they will park. And what happens if the pizza restaurant closes in the future and who or what business will take over? I am against this proposal and want to see residential there on the site. I'm also t he Vice President of the HOA board here and want to also mention that we had a conv ersation with one of the owners about the possibility of selling part of our side yard to m ake the property larger and perhaps more enticing, but we did not advance it very far b ecause the owner couldn't commit to only using the land for residential. Our building ha s expenses, insurance keeps going up for us, so we have folks here who are interested in selling some of the side yard but only if we can guarantee that it would be used for a residential development. In fact 3 of our Board members own units that directly face the site and are open to selling off some of the land, but only if it is for residential use, not c ommercial. I overlook this site and do not support the pizzeria. It was originally propose d as a takeout only place but is now a sit down restaurant and that will result in overflo w traffic into our neighborhood and individuals cutting through our property to access th e restaurant. So I would encourage you to vote no on this. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Tom Bymark, Birchcrest neighborhood. Adding Station Pizzeria to the neighborhood wo uld be a fantastic idea and I'm in full support of it! Locally-owned businesses are the ba ckbone of our vibrant and positive community. A pizza shop offers a casual, family-frien dly environment where neighbors can connect and families can grab lunch or dinner. A dditionally, it provides job opportunities for locals and keeps money circulating within th e community. There will always be people who are against community growth and conn ection, poking holes in plans and looking for issues everywhere. However, the commen ts shared prior to mine are overwhelmingly in favor of the position addition of Station Pi zzeria. Let's support healthy development such as this one and continue to make Edin a a great place to live and dine. Thank you. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 07 December 24 Roger Roe AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Darlene M AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 07 December 24 Tom Bymark AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 666 of 1086 We are in support of Station Pizza joining the Edina Community. I know a lot of people were disappointed when the last restaurant proposal fell through I hope this doesn’t ha ve the same outcome. There seems to be concern over parking, to me the parking lot a t Kees looks bigger than the lot at Red Cow (50th&amp;France) and Station is much m uch smaller restaurant so I don’t think there will be that many cars parking in the neigh borhood, there’s a lot of successful restaurants without any parking in the Mpls area ne ar 50th and doesn’t seem to be an issue with families, elderly etc.. sidewalks do surrou nd the restaurants which are great/necessary and I would assume it would increase pr operty value being in a neighborhood in walking distance to a successful restaurant. I’m an avid walker ( I walk Bredeson Park several times a week and love it.) Many com ments site “walkability” as a positive feature of the proposed pizzeria. There are no sid ewalks along Vernon Ave in front of the site! Parkwood Knolls is lovely; I’ve lived in 2 p roperties here for nearly 20 years. I understood when we bought that the lots are larger , sidewalks fewer (nearly non existent) and I would not have the amenities (banks, groc ery stores, restaurants) that you’d find if we lived near 50th &amp; France, 44th &amp; France etc. The reason this proposal would require so many variances, and code/Com prehensive Plan changes is because neither the site nor the neighborhood are suitable for this commercial enterprise. However—Edina needs more housing, particularly multi housing. The adjacent condo building to the Keeys site has indicated they would consi der selling a portion of their property to accommodate a multi housing building. That w ould be a welcome addition to the neighborhood and Edina. Please take into considerat ion that the features of “community” and “walkability” lauded by proponents are not hon estly achieved with one pizzeria on an unsuitable site; a multi housing residential prop erty would achieve much more for Edina as a whole without the spillover negative effec ts on the immediate neighborhood and very real safety issues with drivers on Vernon A ve. Thank you for reading and considering my input. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 December 24 Clare Manuel AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Please consider AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Liz Olson The Zerbe family supports this plan. -Judith Zerbe (Transcribed by City Staff. Email rec eived 12/7/24 at 1:17PM) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Bob Melander Please listen to the majority of people who live within a block of the proposed site. We do NOT want anything other than residential in an otherwise totally residential neighbor hood. The traffic will become a problem with not enough parking especially since the ci ty is unable to control the maximum number of people they can seat. They are lying to everyone about the maximum number of 20. Please do not allow this to happen. Bob M elander 6105 Eden Prairie Rd. #35 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 667 of 1086 My family currently lives in Parkwood Knolls for the past 6 years and I grew up on High wood Drive for 20 years. We fully, 100% support the development of the Kevin Kees au to shop into a restaurant concept. The area is lacking any sort of community gathering space and an absolute food desert. I ask the mayor and the city council to please look i n the mirror and ask why this particular project has been such a hurdle to get over whe n it appears every project in the 44th &amp; France, 50th &amp; France and Southdale area is green lighted and had zero regard for overdevelopment resulting in absolute gri dlock and extreme congestion in those areas. The auto shop has been an eye sore in t he neighborhood for over 40 years. The time is now to make a decision and move forw ard with what the people want and approve the restaurant proposal or move on and ma ke it into a neighborhood park/green space. J. Rezac &amp; family A list signed by 57 (now 59) immediate neighboring homeowners of the Kee’s Auto Sh op Site was sent to the mayor and council members. We are not opposed to Station Piz zeria or having restaurants on the west side of Edina, but we are opposed to its placem ent on the Kee’s site. As community members, we believe the pizzeria on this small lot will very negatively impact the character and quality of life in our immediate neighborho od. We do not want to experience air pollution and odors from the proposed restaurant’ s large industrial kitchen, to put up with glaring lights from the outdoor signage and par king lights, to endure noise from restaurant operations and patrons, and to have to com pete with restaurant patrons for parking on the streets in front of our homes. And in the future, we do not want to be forced to endure other possible PCD-1 retail operations (s uch as a new restaurant or expansion of the current one with the addition of a liquor lic ense, a possible cannabis dispensary, or other objectionable retail options). We recom mend the Kee’s site be rezoned residential and developed in accordance with the city’s Comprehensive Plan. We ask the mayor and city council to vote "No" and to commit to finding a viable solution that would maintain or enhance the character and quality of life in our existing neighborhood. As for the vast majority of the people who are commentin g on this site wanting the pizzeria, would they still want it if it were to be placed right ne xt door to them? Joan Johnson, Eden Prairie Road Kee’s Auto Shop Neighbor The risks of jamming a commercial business into a residential neighborhood exceed de scribed benefits. The extended fences will demand entrance to Station Pizza by vehicle s alone. Walking and biking would be inconvenient and dangerous. The perceived gath ering place might be allowed but Station Pizza business goals are high volume takeout and delivery of pizzas. The traffic for this business would infringe on county, city, and re sidential neighborhoods. A better use of this property without excessive variances is sti ll in its destiny. Recommend Edina City Council disapprove this proposal. Richard Arno ld GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 December 24 jjruw01 AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Joan Johnson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Elaine Arnold AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 668 of 1086 The Planning Commission’s desire to have gathering places in EVERY neighborhood community in Edina as a model for our city (Planning Commission Meeting (11-13-24) is extremely difficult to “retrofit” into an established city like Edina, with already well-kno wn, built-up, older neighborhoods. • The Planning Commission’s intention to configure t he City of Edina so that there are “walkable food and other offerings as gathering place s in all Edina neighborhoods”, that should be a clearly stated goal of the Edina Long Te rm Plan, with a considerable effort to help all residents understand the final and imple mentation rollout implications. o There would be some difficulties in implementation. o A couple of examples would be: where would the city determine to place such gatherin g spaces in Indian Hills, Dewey Hills, or other established neighborhoods deemed curr ently insufficient of adequate gathering places? I believe this model concept is imprac tical, has not been fully vetted with residents as a long-term Edina plan, and the Kee’s site should not be “an experiment without total Edina representation”. I ASK THE CITY COUNCIL TO VOTE NO and creatively search for other more suitable uses for this pro perty. • Additionally, concentrating on gross numbers for and against in ‘Better Togethe r” may distort the decision process. Neighbors near the Kee’s site will always be outnu mbered and lose the “numbers contest” when the adverse impacts only affect those clo sest to the situation. Those families further away have no need to think through or be c oncerned with disruptions to their nearer neighbors – I get it, it’s not their problem. But i t is a situation that is likely to become our problem and will be almost impossible to rev erse. The City Council should give additional weight to closer neighbor’s comments – those most impacted by this decision…for a true reflection of equity James Allen, 6501 Eden Prairie Road, Edina, MN Dear Mayor Hovland and the city council members, Please uphold the comprehensive plan for future housing on the Kevin Kee’s site and vote no to rezone. - Rezoning to PC D1 opens a Pandora’s box. It would give the city limited options to manage future uses for this property. -There is inadequate parking. There will be less spaces than promised with 6 spaces that back up to the entrance and tandem parking, both presenting safety concerns. It was noted on one of the staff reports that the lack of parking spaces will ca use parking to spill into the surrounding neighborhood. -The traffic study did not appear adequate. It did not seem to fully address the increase in traffic on Vernon for both the sit-down and take-out options of the proposed restaurant. The lack of turn lanes will ca use stopped traffic on both east and west bound lanes on Vernon Ave, where the spee d limit is 40MPH. Cars will be forced to drive through bike lanes. The city has almost no control to change Vernon as it is a county road. -It is Trojan horse for a bigger restaura nt. The report was based on a 20-seat restaurant. There is a seating capacity of 32. It i s a slippery slope. -The owner of Station Pizza committed to have take-out only at the n eighborhood meeting. The planning commission urged them to have a sit-down restaur ant as well as take-out. There was with no further communication with the neighbors. T he planning commission drove the plan. Members stated it would be nice to have anoth er restaurant in Edina, yet none of them live in the neighborhood most impacted. -Ther e are currently two pizza restaurants less than 2 miles from the site, so we do not live i n a pizza desert. The overwhelming number of people who support the restaurant do n ot live in the neighborhood most impacted. Supporting this plan may make their lives sli ghtly more convenient at the cost of the closest neighbors daily quality of life. Please vo te “NO.” Mary KB 6020 Kaymar Drive GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 December 24 JLA AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Gretchen Grey Gretchen Grey The site should be zoned residential in keeping with the neighborhood. It is not suitable for commercial use. Speed limit on Vernon is 40mph with turn access only from east to west, and this would invite accidents and traffic problems on Vernon. This site is unsuitable for a pizza place because of very small site and lack of parking. I recommend it be rezoned for multiple housing to accommodate a 3plex or 4plex in kee ping with the neighborhood. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Kenealy-Bredice, Mary AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 669 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 December 24 Laurie Kuyath I'm Richard Kuyath, husband of Laurie and live on Jeffrey Lane in the immediate neigh borhood behind Kevin Keys. I agree with my wife that this new proposed restaurant wo uld be an added improvement to our area. The reduced size and ample parking has ad dressed the concerns from the first proposal. I hope the Council votes yes. Richard Ku yath AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Jennifer Lund McLenighan We live on Leslee Lane and are in support of this proposal. It seems to address many of the concerns about the previous proposal. It would address the current issue of a va cant lot and unused building. A pizza place with a small seating area and takeout optio n is reasonable and provides an opportunity for a walkable spot on the west side. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Rick Bredice I oppose this project because it involves placing a commercial business on a lot that d oes not conform to zoning and lot dimensions for a neighborhood that is fully residentia l. In order to make this business fit requires rezoning and multiple variances. The impa ct to those of us who live in close proximity is likely to cause traffic and parking congest ion which cannot be accommodated in this neighborhood. I do not see this business ad ding value to this neighborhood. Edina has commercial zones that are intended to supp ort restaurants and other types of businesses. Rick Bredice 6020 Kaymar Drive AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Lisa J My family lives at 5513 Highwood Drive 1 block away from the proposed restaurant at 6016 Vernon. We are very much in favor of having a restaurant in this location as it will provide a walkable location for our family and many of our neighbors. We are very muc h in need of something in this neighborhood that will provide this type of service. We w ould most likely visit this restaurant every week or two with family or friends. We freque ntly walk our neighborhood with our whole family and have no concerns about increase d traffic and the safety of walkers. Previous arguments about serving alcohol leading to loud patrons are assuming the worst. If you go to any similar restaurant of this size and scope this is not an issue. We have visited Station Pizzeria in Minnetonka and have ne ver seen any issues with noise or disorderly patrons. I don't feel that other options that have been considered would benefit the neighborhood as much as a restaurant/cafe. Housing would provide only a small benefit for only 1 or 2 families. A second hand drop off location (as previously considered) does little to benefit the neighborhood and I worr y it would only clutter up the location. Letting this location sit unused and deteriorating i s not a good option either. I was very displeased that the previous restaurant project di d not pass and wholeheartedly endorse this plan. As a neighbor that lives within one bl ock of this location, I ask the City Council to vote YES to this proposal. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Mark Daum This property has become an albatross for the city council and planning department. T he previous auto repair was an eyesore for 40+ years. The local residents who believe the space should be zoned for residential are unrealistic. Do they think a developer will put in single family homes? No. This small parcel of land would undoubtedly have to be multiple story apartments to make financial sense! Do they believe such a building wou ld enhance their property values? Are they anxious to have a 6+ story building there? T he current proposal of a Station Pizza is a good one. It could be built to fit the property and become a local go-to dining option. Plus it is the city who is asking for inside dining ! Not the developer who is clearly trying to work within the city’s parameters. I support t his proposal. Vote YES. It’s time to move forward. Mark Daum Chowen Park Edina AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 670 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 December 24 MS We would love to see a restaurant in this location as there is nothing along that area fo r residents to go to and our city needs to support local ownership of small businesses. The city and council have created unnecessary, significant costs and delays in this proj ect and as a result residents are frustrated with those who we elected. We do not want multi unit housing in this area. Any focus on multi unit housing should be on fixing up e xisting multi unit housing that already exists well before considering adding any more. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Neighbor We completely support this small but important restaurant owned by a local independe nt resident of Edina. Please approve AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 elaubignat I like on Kaymar drive with my wife and two young children. I attended the city council meeting last week and feel very comfortable with this project being done in our neighb orhood. It’s been a commercial building for many years and a restaurant makes a grea t re-use of this odd space. I think it will add character to the neighborhood, add value to the homes nearby and be a great community gathering spot. It’s clear no residential de veloper is interested in the space with how long it’s sat on the market. Let’s do this! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 DougI I support this proposal and believe it would be a wonderful addition to the neighborhoo d. The current building is a such a blight on the neighborhood. We live on Mirror Lakes in the Highlands area and would love to have a small, 20 seat neighborhood restaurant that we could walk or bike to. I don’t see how traffic is going to be an issue as I don’t se e people traveling from all parts of the metro to eat there, mostly those in the neighbor hood. I believe it would add value and a nice addition to the area. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Kevin Day This area of Edina would be perfect for Station Pizza. It will bring the community togeth er, and have little noise pollution for our surrounding houses. This is a no brainer! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Kevin Day This area of Edina would be perfect for Station Pizza. It will bring the community togeth er, and have little noise pollution for our surrounding houses. This is a no brainer! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Angela L. We are extremely excited and supportive for the pizza place proposal! It would be a val ue add for the neighborhood in many ways. We live on Kaymar Drive right around the c orner and would love the walkability to a local establishment. It would be the perfect sp ot to gather with our kids, friends and neighbors. We vote YES! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 671 of 1086 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 December 24 Angela L. We are extremely excited and supportive for the pizza place proposal! It would be a val ue add for the neighborhood in many ways. We live on Kaymar Drive right around the c orner and would love the walkability to a local establishment. It would be the perfect sp ot to gather with our kids, friends and neighbors. We vote YES! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Angela L. We are extremely excited and supportive for the pizza place proposal! It would be a val ue add for the neighborhood in many ways. We live on Kaymar Drive right around the c orner and would love the walkability to a local establishment. It would be the perfect sp ot to gather with our kids, friends and neighbors. We vote YES! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Eileen K I strongly support the idea of Station Pizza joining the neighborhood. I love the idea of h aving a restaurant close, to be able to walk to and from and a place to bring the neighb orhood together. We live across Vernon, and love the idea of somewhere close for the kids to meet their friends for lunch or even work at. Please vote YES to Station Pizza! AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 LB We strongly support the new station pizza proposal. We have two young children and li ve a couple blocks away. We have been excited about having a restaurant in walking d istance to connect with our neighbors over food and support our community. This is a v oid in our neighborhood today and we would love to be able to walk somewhere as opp osed to driving. I look at this opportunity very positively. We are tired of the old, vacant building and are in favor of the Station Pizza approval. Please approve this plan - this i s what our neighborhood needs. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 LB We strongly support the new station pizza proposal. We have two young children and li ve a couple blocks away. We have been excited about having a restaurant in walking d istance to connect with our neighbors over food and support our community. This is a v oid in our neighborhood today and we would love to be able to walk somewhere as opp osed to driving. I look at this opportunity very positively. We are tired of the old, vacant building and are in favor of the Station Pizza approval. Please approve this plan - this i s what our neighborhood needs. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 LB We strongly support the new station pizza proposal. We have two young children and li ve a couple blocks away. We have been excited about having a restaurant in walking d istance to connect with our neighbors over food and support our community. This is a v oid in our neighborhood today and we would love to be able to walk somewhere as opp osed to driving. I look at this opportunity very positively. We are tired of the old, vacant building and are in favor of the Station Pizza approval. Please approve this plan - this i s what our neighborhood needs. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 672 of 1086 We strongly support the new station pizza proposal. We have two young children and li ve a couple blocks away. We have been excited about having a restaurant in walking d istance to connect with our neighbors over food and support our community. This is a v oid in our neighborhood today and we would love to be able to walk somewhere as opp osed to driving. I look at this opportunity very positively. We are tired of the old, vacant building and are in favor of the Station Pizza approval. Please approve this plan - this i s what our neighborhood needs. We support the new Station Pizza proposal! We live in Edina and our child went to Edi na schools up until he left for college. We go to the Station Pizza location in Minnetonka on the regular and would LOVE to have one closer to us. It's a local family-owned busin ess, owners live in Edina, with kids in the Edina schools too. I don't think you could ask for a better fit for that land. I would SO much prefer to have Station Pizza there than a chain restaurant or a store. Station pizza is a wonderful family-friendly place and they a re civically minded. They give back to the community and host community events. Edin a needs more of everything Station Pizza has to offer: a walkable, family-friendly, locall y owned restaurant for casual dining or take out. We live right around the corner and definitely support the Station Pizza proposal. Resta urants like this can become the heart of the neighborhood. A place where us as neighb ors can meet up, our families can connect, or we could meet friends for a slice of their diesel pizza. Yes, I actually went to their Minnetonka location and was impressed by th e food and ambiance. Personally, I think having a new, exciting dining option can make our neighborhood more attractive. It's not practical for low-income housing. It feels like we have enough stations in the area. This (Station Pizza) proposal would also create n ew jobs in the area - kitchen staff, servers, delivery drivers, or management. This adds to our community in numerous ways. Station Pizza just feels right and I hope we welco me them into the neighborhood. GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 December 24 LB AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 Kenealy-Bredice, Mary So council members, there was a barrage of input for the Station Pizza . There are inte rnet groups encouraging people to respond in the affirmative. We do not know where al l these people live or why they are responding. The directions say to identify yourself a nd your address. Many people did not follow the directions and there are repeats of the same comments. This open forum was supposed to close at noon. It did not. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 SG Susan Gruidl, morningside We strongly support the new station pizza proposal. We ha ve lived in Edina for 20+ years and our kids attended Highlands, It would have been a great place to go with our kids after school events. Pizza is a family friendly and there i s a need for more of this type of restaurant in Edina near our homes. It would add som ething like snuffy's feel for this area. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 MJB Matt Bierschbach, Todd Park It'd be great to have Station Pizza close by. It would also be a great use of that particular property. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 amelia bierschbach AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 EdinaErik AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 673 of 1086 Better Together Edina : Summary Report for 30 January 2019 to 10 December 2024 Page 48 of 50 We live right around the corner and definitely support the Station Pizza proposal. Resta urants like this can become the heart of the neighborhood. A place where us as neighb ors can meet up, our families can connect, or we could meet friends for a slice of their diesel pizza. Yes, I actually went to their Minnetonka location and was impressed by th e food and ambiance. Personally, I think having a new, exciting dining option can make our neighborhood more attractive. It's not practical for low-income housing. It feels like we have enough stations in the area. This (Station Pizza) proposal would also create n ew jobs in the area - kitchen staff, servers, delivery drivers, or management. This adds to our community in numerous ways. Station Pizza just feels right and I hope we welco me them into the neighborhood. We live right around the corner and definitely support the Station Pizza proposal. Resta urants like this can become the heart of the neighborhood. A place where us as neighb ors can meet up, our families can connect, or we could meet friends for a slice of their diesel pizza. Yes, I actually went to their Minnetonka location and was impressed by th e food and ambiance. Personally, I think having a new, exciting dining option can make our neighborhood more attractive. It's not practical for low-income housing. It feels like we have enough stations in the area. This (Station Pizza) proposal would also create n ew jobs in the area - kitchen staff, servers, delivery drivers, or management. This adds to our community in numerous ways. Station Pizza just feels right and I hope we welco me them into the neighborhood. EdinaErik AGREES 0 REPLIES 0 DISAGREES 0 First time using technology I guess... Sorry for submitting three times. Hi, my name is Jennifer and I live on Leslie Lane, which is very close to the Station Piz zeria (or the Kevin Kee’s). I am fully in support of this. I live about a block and a half aw ay. I don't have any concerns with the variances or the increased traffic or parking. I ha ve frequented their Minnetonka location and frequently have to drive out there to get ta ke our pizza because it's excellent food. And I do support you going forward with the St ation Pizzeria. Thank you. (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/6/24 at 2:3 0PM) GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 08 December 24 EdinaErik AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 08 December 24 EdinaErik AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 09 December 24 Mkedina MSchultz, I live in the Bredeson Park area, one block from the proposed project and fe el Station Pizza would be a great addition to the neighborhood. Edina, particularly this area, would benefit from having a family friendly, nice-looking, well-maintained establis hment in this location. AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 09 December 24 Liz Olson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 09 December 24 Liz Olson Hi, this is Mary Jane Hacket. I live at 5801 Vernon Lane (the little old people roundabo ut so to speak). I am so excited that there would be somewhere to grab a bite or get ta ke-out that conveniently. I’m 100 percent behind it and have been since that property w as talked about initially for a restaurant. We really need something like that, that's so c onvenient. So please, that's my input. I want it and I love the idea. Bye. Bye. (Transcrib ed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/7/24 at 9:40AM) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 674 of 1086 Better Together Edina : Summary Report for 30 January 2019 to 10 December 2024 Page 49 of 50 Hi, my name is Gail Vaster. I live on Vernon Avenue at the 6650 Fountain Woods buildi ng, and I was just calling about the pizzeria at 6016 Vernon Avenue. I just wanted to ca ll in and voice my opinion of support. I think would be a fantastic idea if they rezoned a l ot to be able to put the pizzeria in there and just wanted to verbalize my support for the city council and the rezoning committee. Awesome. Thank you. Very much. Have a gre at rest of your day. Bye. (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/7/24 at 11:29 AM) Good evening. I'm calling to show my support for Station Pizzeria at 6016 Vernon Ave. My name is Patrick McGovern. My wife and daughter and myself live at 5101 William A venue. We are 100% in favor and hoping for approval for a new restaurant, and especi ally Station Pizzeria where I am well aware of Jake and his commitment to provide a w onderful product, atmosphere, and support of Edina community business and athletics and youth groups. This is a wonderful opportunity to get him involved as well as former opportunities that should have been approved. In our opinion we need more business, especially the restaurant business in Edina. Thank you very much. (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/7/24 at 5:17 PM) Hi, this is Dave Austin calling from 5517 Highwood Drive. I'm just a block and a half aw ay from the proposed station pizzeria location, and although I was against the original r estaurant that had like 80 seats a while ago, I've always thought that we needed some type of a small food destination spot on that Kevin Kee’s location and I think this Statio n Pizzeria would be perfect condition. It's only 20 seats. Not a lot of people. We’re in a barren wasteland of restaurants in this area, and it's walkable for so many people. I jus t think it would be a great addition to the neighborhood. I don't think it's going to be brin ging in any outside traffic. It’s a neighborhood they're in dire need of over here. And I'm only block and a half away from it. I would drive, you know, whatever traffic there is will affect me too. But I'm for it. I hope you guys pass it. I think it's important and it'll be a gr eat addition to this neighborhood. Thank you. (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail rece ived 12/6/24 at 5:19PM) GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 09 December 24 Liz Olson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 09 December 24 Liz Olson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 09 December 24 Liz Olson My name is Jeanet Swofford and I live at 6017 Kaymar Drive. I'd like to express my op position to the currently proposed pizza place at the Kevin Kee’s location. I'm concerne d about having unlimited seats in it, and the parking that would come with it, et cetera. I'm opposed, Thank you. (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/7/24 at 8:39 PM) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 09 December 24 Liz Olson My name is Maureen Lannan and my address is 6105 Eden Prairie Rd., # 14. I am opp osed to the pizza place to go in at 6016 Vernon Avenue. Cars coming and going in and out of Vernon, where the speed limit is 40 miles an hour. They need to cross a bike lan e going and coming. There's no left hand turn lane. There will be accidents because of the bikes as well as cars and people. There will be city liability. Thank you. I hope you v ote “no.” (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/8/24 at 8:16 PM) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 09 December 24 Liz Olson AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 675 of 1086 Better Together Edina : Summary Report for 30 January 2019 to 10 December 2024 Page 50 of 50 GUEST BOOK Public Input- 6016 Vernon Avenue 09 December 24 Liz Olson This is Stephanie Trebil. We would like to provide input for 6016 Vernon Avenue. We s upport the building of Station Pizza and support Jake Shafer building and remodeling o n the Kee’s auto repair site. We support and would appreciate having a neighborhood r estaurant within walking distance of our house which is 6009 Saxony Road, thank you. (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/8/24 at 11:25PM) AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Page 676 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 9.4 Prepared By: Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Engineering Item Title: Resolution No. 2024-115: Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway and Alley Reconstruction, Improvement Nos. BA-466 and A-293 Action Requested: Approve Resolution No. 2024-115 Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway and Alley Reconstruction, Improvement Nos. BA-466 and A-293. Information/Background: On December 9, 2024, the City Council reviewed the Engineering Study and conducted a public hearing on the Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Project. The City provided individuals several ways to provide public input in the public hearing. Between November 22, 2024, when public hearing notices were mailed and noon Thursday, Dec. 12, when the public hearing closed, five comments were received on BetterTogetherEdina.org (BTE). As you might recall, eight people provided in-person testimony. Throughout the process, residents have been told it was not necessary to provide testimony in more than one way; all feedback is considered equally, regardless of the way in which it was submitted. Testimony and staff report are attached. Resources/Financial Impacts: The overall project cost is estimated at $17,617,560. Funding will be a combination of special assessments, City Utility and Pedestrian and Cyclists Safety (PACS) funds, and property taxes. Relationship to City Policies: The project includes CIP Nos. 19-310 and ENG21021. Budget Pillar: Strong Foundation Livable City Better Together Values Impact: Stewardship Systematic replacement of infrastructure extends the life of all the infrastructure. Engagement Providing engagement opportunities with residents helps shape the project. Page 677 of 1086 Supporting Documentation: 1. Resolution No. 2024-115 Presidents A&B, Improvement Nos. BA-466 and A-293 2. Staff Report Dec. 17 3. Better Together Edina Public Testimony 4. Engineering Study BA-466 5. Certificate of Mailing 6. Staff Presentation Dec. 9 Page 678 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-115 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT FOR PRESIDENTS A and B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NOS. BA-466 and A-293 WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the 6th day of November 2024, fixed a date for a council hearing on Improvement Nos. BA-466 and A-293, the proposed improvement of Presidents A and B Neighborhood Roadway and Alley Reconstruction; and WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weekly published notices of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 9th day of December 2024, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible to update aging infrastructure. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 3. The city engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. 4. The city council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement from the proceeds of tax exempt bonds. Dated: December 17, 2024 Attest: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its regular meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Special Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ______ day of __________, 20___. _______________________________ City Clerk Page 679 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Information / Background: On December 9, 2024, the City Council reviewed the Engineering Study and conducted a public hearing on the Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Project. The City provided individuals several ways to provide public input in the public hearing. Between November 22, 2024, when public hearing notices were mailed and noon Thursday, Dec. 12, when the public hearing closed, five comments were received on BetterTogetherEdina.org (BTE). As you might recall, eight people provided in-person testimony. Throughout the process, residents have been told it was not necessary to provide testimony in more than one way; all feedback is considered equally, regardless of the way in which it was submitted. The testimony included requests related to: 1. The proposed roadway width, parking and multi-modal facility changes on Washington Avenue and Belmore Lane (24-ft wide street, 8-ft wide shared-use path with a boulevard, one-sided parking) and Monroe Avenue (24-ft wide street, 5-ft wide sidewalk with a boulevard, one-sided parking) a. Opposition to shared-use paths and sidewalks b. Opposition to roadway narrowing c. Opposition to the maintenance burden for property owners d. Opposition to tree removals e. Opposition to loss of parking i. Additional traffic and parking occurs during events at Alden Park ii. Two-sided parking makes it difficult to travel the streets during Alden Park events 2. Safety, including: a. Vehicle speeds on Washington Avenue Date: December 17, 2024 To: Mayor and City Council From: Aaron T. Ditzler, PE, Assistant City Engineer Subject: Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction – Public Hearing Testimony Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-115: Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement Nos. BA-466 and A-293. Recall the pending assessment is $8,600 per REU for roadway improvements. Page 680 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 b. Semi-truck volume on Washington Avenue 3. The proposed roadway width changes to the streets without proposed multi-modal facilities (27-ft wide, 3-ft reduction), including: a. Opposition to the roadway narrowing b. A request for cost difference between 27-ft and 30-ft wide streets 4. Miscellaneous, including: a. Support for the roadway and utility improvements b. Opposed to paving the gravel alley with asphalt c. Request to view the Preliminary Market Benefit Report Based on public hearing input, staff responses: 1. Living Street Plan standards, including reduction of street widths a. Reduces construction costs and associated assessments b. Reduces future roadway maintenance costs c. Reduced lane widths encourage slower motor vehicle speeds d. Reduces environmental impacts by minimizing impervious surfaces e. Often preserves and protects trees and other plantings or infrastructure from construction impacts 2. Sidewalk and shared-use path snow maintenance a. Staff reviewed sidewalk and shared-use path snow removal operations and practices. Recall these were reviewed with City Council at the October 15, 2024, Work Session. All the proposed multi-modal facilities do not meet current snow removal practices. Staff would not recommend adding more maintenance to staff workload. If directed by City Council to remove snow from these multi-modal facilities, it should be noted that either the expected 48-hour service level will not be met, or additional FTE staff and equipment will be necessary. 3. Parking Reduction a. Due to the proposed change from parking on both sides of the street to parking on one side of the street due to multi-modal facility installation, the following streets have a potential reduction in parking spaces i. Monroe Avenue, up to 27 available spaces ii. Belmore Lane, up to 50 available spaces 4. Alden Park events / Parking / Belmore Lane travel lane widths a. Parking is currently prohibited on the north side of Belmore Lane adjacent to Alden Park between Monroe Avenue and Van Buren Avenue. b. Estimated potential additional vehicles parking in the neighborhood during Alden Park athletic events is 30 to 80 c. The existing Belmore Lane drive lane is 8-ft wide when vehicles park on both sides of the street during Alden Park events d. The staff proposed 24-ft street width with one-sided parking increases the driving lane width from 8-ft to 8.5-ft Page 681 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 5. Washington Avenue a. Widening on the west side of Washington Avenue to accommodate bicycle lanes or additional parking lane is impractical due to the electrical transformer and Highway 169 overhead sign foundations. See exhibits A and B at the end of this report. b. Staff has reached out to UNFI, the property owner at 201 3rd Street and 101 Jefferson Ave in Hopkins, requesting that they discourage their truck drivers from utilizing Washington Ave to and from their distribution centers. i. There is no language in the City’s Code of Ordinances restricting semi-truck traffic on local streets, including Washington Avenue, except for during spring load restrictions. c. There are 18 parcels along Washington Avenue. 11 have driveway access off Washington Avenue, 3 have access off an adjacent alley, 2 have access off Belmore Lane, 1 has access off Maloney Avenue and 1 has access off 3rd Street. The City’s Code of Ordinances restricts parking in alleys and on-street parking is restricted on both sides of Maloney Avenue. Removing the parking lane on Washington Avenue will leave 15 properties with nowhere to park other than within their driveways or on one side of Belmore Lane or 3rd Street. 6. Miscellaneous a. Adjacent to the project area includes the following amenities, as shown in Exhibit C at the end of this report i. Harley Hopkins Park, Van Valkenburg Park ii. Harley Hopkins Family Center and Blake School iii. Multiple regional trails iv. Metro Transit Route 612 and Metro Transit Green Line Extension v. Downtown Hopkins b. On proposed 24-ft wide streets with sidewalks or shared-use paths, staff proposes a turf boulevard between 3 and 5-ft for snow storage. The boulevard also provides design flexibility as it can be reduced in certain areas to protect mature trees and minimize other right-of-way impacts. c. If every street in the project area were reconstructed to the existing 30-ft street width, the assessment cost would increase by an estimated $825 per residential equivalent unit (REU). This would be an increase of 9.6% over the current estimated assessment per REU. i. Includes estimated costs for tree removals, tree replacements, retaining walls, etc. d. If the staff proposed 24-ft street width along Washington Avenue, Monroe Avenue and Belmore Lane were reconstructed to a 27-ft street width, the assessment cost would increase by an estimated $275 per residential equivalent unit (REU). This would be an increase of 3.2% over the current estimated assessment per REU. i. Includes estimated costs for tree removals, tree replacements, retaining walls, etc. e. Public Works staff reiterated their recommendation to pave the gravel alley with asphalt to avoid frequent maintenance of the gravel alley. f. The Preliminary Market Benefit report is available on the BTE website. i. https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/24962/widgets/84083/documents/59821 Page 682 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 g. Although the deadline to provide live testimony expires on December 9 at the Public Hearing, residents have the opportunity to provide feedback until December 17 on the BTE website. i. https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/presidents-ab?tool=guest_book#tool_tab Based on public hearing input, staff recommends the following changes: 1. Following consultation with Parks and Recreation staff, staff recommends widening Belmore Lane to the north adjacent to Alden Park to create a parking bay for park users. This would allow the City to permit parking on the south side of Belmore Lane adjacent to the park (approximately 13 additional parking stalls). Parking would be restricted on the south side of Belmore Lane for the rest of the project area. 2. Revise 3rd Street roadway width from 24-ft to 27-ft wide to provide a buffer between the driving lane and existing shared use path on the north side of the street. Exhibit A – Washinton Avenue electrical transformer Page 683 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Exhibit B – Washinton Avenue overhead sign and foundation Page 684 of 1086 BLAKE RDEXCELSIOR BLVD MALONEY AVE December 2024± 0 650Feet I2 I2 The BlakeSchool Harley HopkinsFamily Center /Park AldenPark Blake RoadLRT Station DowntownHopkinsLRT Station DowntownPark Van ValkenburgPark OverpassStatePark BufferPark GrandviewCemetery Park ValleyPlayground Valley Park Presidents A/B Reconstruction Project Exhibit C - Adjacent Area Map Burnes Park HWY 169East EndDistrict Downtown HopkinsDistrict Lincoln & 7thNode METRO Green Line LRTNine Mile Creek Regional TrailCedar Lake L R T Regi onal Trail North Cedar Lake Regional TrailLake M i n n e t o n k a LRT R e g i o n a l T r a i l UNFICampus Presidents A/BProject Limits City of Edina City of Hopkins Page 685 of 1086 Contributors 5 CONTRIBUTIONS 5 03 December 24 John Nightingale AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 06 December 24 Karinahayes AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 09 December 24 CE AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 GUEST BOOK Public Input - Presidents A & B Reconstruction In regards to the proposed sidewalk on Monroe Avenue, I have spoken with or heard the sentiment of my neighbors (that I know) in 300, 302, 305, 306 (me), 308, 314 and 315 and all are opposed to such an un-needed reduction in the usefulness of Monroe Avenue South by reducing our parking for our homes and drivability of said road. I have heard of no one in favor of the sidewalk on our short 4 block street. I currently work from home and my home office faces the street and the minimal bikers and hikers on this avenue are so minimal and currently have no troubles using Monroe Avenue as is. Also, a reduction in the width of the new planned street (my understanding) decreases our usability as well, whether driving, walking or biking. If the desires of the Monroe Avenue residents is not enough to sway you, then maybe the Edina taxpayer in general could cach a break from passing on this un-necessary and un-needed expenditure. Respectfully, John Nightingale My husband and I live on Jefferson Ave. We take frequent hour long walks around the neighborhood with our two dogs. Never once have we felt like sidewalks are needed although many streets we are walking on do not have them. People drive safely throughout our neighborhood and there is not an abundance of cars driving through. Additionally , we rarely, if ever, see people biking in our neighborhood to need bike lanes. Many of t he neighbors we’ve talked with are young home owners like ourselves that do not see t his project as necessary and do not feel as though these things are needed in our community. Lastly, as young home owners, this expense is massive for us even if spread over years on our taxes. Thank you for taking the time to listen to our thoughts. Project proposal notes homeowners may replace home sewer-line (from home to city line) during reconstruction project, and that the cost can be added to the overall assessment for the property. My questions: Will the city vet a preferred contractor for this work ? Or will each homeowner need to hire a contractor individually if they desire sewer-line replacement during the project? If the former, when will we get an idea of the costs for this work? Also, will the city provide a contact who will coordinate timing of this work? Thank you, Claudia Eggan 11 December 24 Liz Moore AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 I am Thomas Wendel, I live at 302 Monroe Ave. The topic I would like to discuss is the Better Together Edina Presidents A & B Reconstruction site is no longer allowing submittals of public comments. Which I thought was going to be available until Thursday to be compiled with statements after Monday's meeting. So, my comment is I think homeowners on Monroe Ave should have the option of using additional planting strip in front of their properties to retain street parking, similar to what's currently in front of the 313 and 315 Washington Avenue properties. Thank you. (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/10/24 at 3:10PM) Hi, my name is Ann Landgaard. I live at 6606 Belmore Lane. I attended the City Council Meeting Dec 9th and my husband and I just want to say thank you to the Council for its careful work on the President’s renovation project and thank you to all the presenters who were so thorough and so well prepared. We think this is a great project. We walk in the streets and have with our children and now our grandchildren, going to Alden Park and walking down to the trail behind our house, the Hopkins Trail and its dangerous. People speed on Belmore because it is so wide. Particularly, when they are traveling east from Harrison to Blake Road. There is no stop sign and it is kind of a rollercoaster literally with descending hill. The speed is quite remarkable. I bet 50 mph occasionally. So, I am in favor of the project, both for safety for everyone, and for the aesthetic and f or the connection between neighbors. Neighbors chat on sidewalks and I think that is another safety element for this project. So, I hope I don't get some sort of hate mail for leaving this message or calls, but that's how we feel. And we're very supportive. Thank you. (Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received 12/11/24 at 10:30AM) 11 December 24 Liz Moore AGREES 0 DISAGREES 0 REPLIES 0 Visitors 29 Page 686 of 1086 ENGINEERING STUDY PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION Adams Avenue, Belmore Lane, Harrison Avenue, Jackson Avenue, Jefferson Avenue, Monroe Avenue, Madison Avenue, Tyler Avenue, Tyler Court, Van Buren Avenue, Washington Avenue, 3rd Street IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-466 AND A-293 DECEMBER 2, 2024 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 42003 12/2/24 Aaron Ditzler Reg. No. Date Page 687 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 2 SUMMARY: The project involves reconstruction of local bituminous streets, a bituminous alley, a gravel alley, replacement of existing concrete curb and gutter, installation of new concrete curb and gutter, construction of new concrete sidewalk and shared-use paths, lining of sanitary sewer, localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer, installation of new watermain, and installation of new storm sewer systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $17,617,560. 42.14% of the roadway cost will be funded through property taxes and 57.86% will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $8,600 per residential equivalent unit (REU). 42.14% of the gravel alley cost will be funded through property taxes and 57.86% will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $1,300 per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $12,537,900 and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Sidewalk improvements are estimated to cost $250,200 and will be funded through the Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund. INITIATION: The project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services” and “maintain a sound public infrastructure” and the “Strong Foundations” City budget goal. This project addresses updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, watermain system, storm sewer system, sanitary sewer system and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. LOCATION: The project includes Adams Avenue, Belmore Lane, Harrison Avenue, Jackson Avenue, Jefferson Avenue, Madison Avenue, Monroe Avenue, Tyler Avenue, Tyler Court and Van Buren Avenue. It also includes 3rd Street and Washington Avenue within the Cities of Edina and Hopkins. A detailed location map of the project is shown in Figure 1. Page 688 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 3 Figure 1: Project Area Map EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The roadways in this neighborhood were originally constructed in the 1950s as gravel streets, followed by bituminous pavement in the 1960s following utility installation (see Photo 1). Page 689 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 4 Photo 1: President A/B Neighborhood, 1960 Maintenance records indicate Washington Avenue South was seal coated in 2007 and overlayed in 2017. 2nd Street South was reconstructed in 2013 in a joint project led by the City of Hopkins. All of the streets in the neighborhood have concrete curb and gutter. The roadway width is 30’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb). A recent geotechnical evaluation of the project area performed by Braun Intertec showed the roadway section varies from 2.25” to 5.5” of pavement over an apparent aggregate base followed by an assortment of clay, clayey sand, and silty sand soils. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is 78 and the average PCI for Presidents A/B is 26. An example of the current pavement condition can be seen in Photo 2. Page 690 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 5 Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Alleys There are two alleys with poor pavement condition within the Presidents A/B project area, as shown in Photos 3 and 4 and Table 1. Both alleys are currently maintained by the City (including snow plowing). Alley Extents Adjacent Properties Surface Jefferson – Madison Aves Belmore Ln to 3rd St S 16 Bituminous Washington – Adams Aves 250’ south of Belmore Ln to Belmore Ln 9 Gravel Table 1: Presidents A/B Alleys in Poor Condition Page 691 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 6 Photo 3: Existing Gravel Alley Condition Photo 4: Existing Bituminous Alley Condition Page 692 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 7 Traffic and Crash Data Staff measured traffic volumes and speeds at several locations within or near the neighborhood. Average daily 2024 traffic volumes within the neighborhood range between 143 and 2,748 vehicles per day with 85th percentile speeds between 26.8 and 38.9 miles per hour. Local street Washington Avenue accounts for the higher volume and speed data. Traffic and crash data for this project is shown in Appendix A. Multi-Modal Transportation Pedestrian Facilities A shared-use path is present on the north side of 3rd Street South in Hopkins between Washington Avenue South and Monroe Avenue and is in good condition. A shared-use path is present immediately adjacent to the project area on 2nd Street South in Hopkins between Monroe Avenue and Harrison Avenue, which extends east of Harrison Avenue along the Blake School property to Blake Road. A sidewalk is also present immediately adjacent to the project area on Maloney Avenue between Washington Avenue and Blake Road (see Appendix B). Bicycle Facilities Other than the previously mentioned shared-use paths, there are no bicycle facilities (see Appendix C). Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 9” vitrified clay pipe (VCP) and 9” cured-in- place pipe (CIPP). Most of the sanitary sewer system was installed between 1955 and 1957, except for side yard and rear yard pipes which were CIPP lined in 2017, and Alden Park’s Water Treatment Plant No. 4 recycle waste 4” forcemain. Historical records indicate there has been a significant number of sewer back-ups or blockages in the area. (see Appendix D). No City of Hopkins sanitary sewer main exists in the project area. Watermain The watermain system consists of 6-16” cast iron pipe (CIP) installed in 1963 and 1964. An 8” ductile iron pipe (DIP) interconnect with the City of Hopkins was installed in 2013. Wells 12 and 13 and Water Treatment Plant No. 4 in Alden Park were installed in 1964 and 1971. The overall system has experienced a significant number of breaks (see Appendix D). Most of the fire hydrants are original to the neighborhood. No City of Hopkins watermain exists in the project area. Some homes in the neighborhood were constructed prior to the availability of municipal water. Although several have had private wells properly sealed, City records suggest some remain unsealed. Based on Utility Billing records, there are no properties in the project area that rely on private wells for domestic water. Page 693 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 8 Storm Sewer The storm sewer network is in the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. The system consists primarily of 12-30” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), along with portions of 12-24” corrugated metal pipe (CMP) installed between 1963 and 1971. Am 18” DIP storm sewer pipe was installed in Alden Park in 2005 to facilitate overflow at the water treatment facility. There are a moderate number of storm sewer inlets and pipes located within the project area. Most streets within the project area drains to a storm sewer systems along either 2nd Street, Belmore Lane or Maloney Avenue that then drain into MnDOT owned storm sewer along Highway 169. A small portion drains to storm sewer that drains to Mirror Lake (and subsequently, Bredesen Park in the Nine Mile Creek watershed). Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications, cable and fiber optic utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overhead and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. Street lighting consists of standard “cobra head” lights mounted on wooden poles located throughout the project area operated by Xcel Energy. 4 standard “cobra head” lights mounted on wooden poles are located in Arden Park and are operated by the City of Edina as shown in Appendix E. DESIGN INPUT: City Council 2018 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan This plan, part of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, was developed to guide the City’s efforts to create a comprehensive pedestrian and bicycle network. As shown in Appendix B, there is a proposed sidewalk on Monroe Avenue between Maloney Avenue and 2nd Street. As shown in Appendices B and C, there is a proposed sidewalk and bike lane on Washington Avenue between Maloney Avenue and 3rd Street. Appendices B and C show proposed sidewalk and bicycle lanes on Washington Avenue and Lincoln Drive adjacent to the project area and Van Valkenburg Park. Appendix C also shows proposed bike lanes on Maloney Avenue adjacent to the project area. 2015 Living Streets Policy This policy balances the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. The City will apply the Policy to all street projects, including those involving operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation or change in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. The Living Streets Plan includes 15 principles to guide implementation of the Policy, divided into four categories: All Users and All Modes, Connectivity, Context Sensitivity and Sustainability. Below is a summary of how these principles are incorporated into this project: Page 694 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 9 All Users and All Modes – This project will improve mobility and access to the transportation network for a variety of users, including pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors and people with disabilities. Replacement of the pavement surfaces and traffic control signage will enhance safety and convenience for all users. Connectivity – This project involves maintaining a transportation system that can accommodate all modes of travel. Existing facilities form a multimodal network within the neighborhood. Context Sensitivity – Engineering strives to preserve and protect natural features within or adjacent to construction sites where feasible, including trees, waterways and sensitive slopes. Residents within the project area were invited to complete a questionnaire soliciting input on project design components, including multi-modal transportation, street lighting and local drainage problems. Sustainability – Engineering works closely with Public Works to implement infrastructure improvements with consideration of lifecycle costs and future maintenance. The new roadway section can be easily maintained long-term with the use of proactive rehabilitation treatments, which will significantly extend the life of the pavement. Reductions in impervious surfaces benefit water quality and may lessen the demand for chemicals to manage snow and ice (such as chloride). Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work; this includes utilizing trenchless technologies, such as pipe bursting or cured-in-place sanitary sewer system, minimizing regional wastewater treatment, reducing the risk of sewage surcharges, and limiting the risk of back-ups to residential properties. Relevant portions of the Living Streets Plan can be found in Appendix F. Water Resource Management Plan (December 2022 Amendment) Municipal stormwater systems provide multiple functions, including runoff management (removal of stormwater) and flood risk reduction. The system is composed of structural or engineered control devices and facilities to treat, convey, or store polluted stormwater. Enhancing public infrastructure by building new, retrofitting old, and maintaining existing in working condition is a key action to reducing flood exposure. City Council adopted the Flood Risk Reduction Strategy in 2020, and it was incorporated into the Water Resources Management Plan (WRMP) by major amendment. The primary goal for the City’s flood risk reduction effort is to improve public safety and reduce the exposure of private principal structures to flooding. It is the City’s standard practice to provide a 10-percent-annual-chance level of service and 1-percent-annual-chance level (also referred to as the 10-year and 100-year frequency events, respectively) of protection for principal structures for the City’s stormwater conveyance systems, where feasible. The WRMP identified multiple areas of flood inundation within the project area for both the 10-percent and 1-percent-annual-chance flood event. The first area is along Washington Avenue between 3rd Street and Maloney Avenue, as shown in Figure 2. Page 695 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 10 Figure 2: Washington Avenue and Backyard Flood Zone (169N_5, 169N_7) This modeled area impacts both the roadway and backyard sections of Washington Avenue and the backyard section of Adams Avenue. Approximately 3.6 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties discharges to the City’s storm sewer system that drains into the MnDOT storm sewer system along Highway 169. 3 structures could be impacted by the 100-year flood zones. Potential manhole surcharging was also identified in the 1-percent and 10-percent-annual-chance events. Page 696 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 11 The second area includes the backyard at 316 Madison Avenue and the backyards between Jefferson Avenue and Madison Avenue south of Belmore Lane as shown in Figure 3. Figure 3: Jefferson Avenue and Madison Avenue Backyard Flood Zones (169N_4) Two backyard depression areas collect 2.4 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties and discharge to the City’s storm sewer system which then drains into the MnDOT storm sewer system along Highway 169. The 1-percent and 10-percent- annual-chance events could impact the structures at 409 and 411 Jefferson Avenue. The third area includes Tyler Court and the backyards of homes between Harrison Avenue and Tyler Avenue north of Maloney Avenue as shown in Figure 4. Page 697 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 12 Figure 4: Harrison Avenue, Tyler Avenue, Maloney Avenue, Tyler Court, and Backyard Flood Zone (ML_21, ML_35, ML_19) A backyard depression area collect over 4 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties and discharge to the City’s storm sewer system along Maloney Avenue which then drains to storm sewer along Tyler Court that drains to Mirror Lake (and subsequently, Bredesen Park in the Nine Mile Creek watershed). The 1-percent- annual-chance events could impact the structure at 425 Harrison Avenue. The modeled areas also impact both the roadway and backyard sections of Tyler Court. Approximately 7 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties Page 698 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 13 discharge to the City’s storm sewer system that runs along Tyler Court that drains to Mirror Lake (and subsequently, Bredesen Park in the Nine Mile Creek watershed). 5 structures could be impacted by the 10- and 100-year flood zones. Potential manhole surcharging was also identified in the 1-percent and 10-percent-annual- chance events. The fourth area includes the backyards between Harrison Avenue and Dearborn Court north of Belmore Lane as shown in Figure 5. Figure 5: Harrison Avenue and Backyard Flood Zone (NC_2) A backyard depression area collect over 3.3 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties and discharge to the City’s storm sewer system along the rear yards between Harrison Avenue and Dearborn Court, then to 2nd Street and finally drains into the MnDOT storm sewer system along Highway 169. The 1-percent- annual-chance events could impact the structures at 307 and 311 Harrison Avenue. The fifth area includes Monroe Avenue backyards south of Belmore Lane as shown in Figure 6. Page 699 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 14 Figure 6: Monroe Avenue and Backyard Flood Zone (169N_20a) A backyard depression at 401, 403 and 405 Monroe Avenue collects 0.9 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties and discharge to the City’s storm sewer system along Belmore Lane, then drains into the MnDOT storm sewer system along Highway 169. The 1-percent and 10-percent-annual-chance events could impact the structures at 401 and 403 Monroe Avenue. Climate Action Plan The CAP identified the following strategies that align with this roadway reconstruction project. Transportation and Land Use (TL) 1: Decrease community-wide vehicle miles traveled by 7% by 2030. Action TL 1-2: Accelerate building on-street and off-street protected bike lanes, sidewalks, crosswalks, and other walking infrastructure in high-need areas and fill connectivity gaps as identified in the City's Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. TL 2: Double public transit commuter ridership from 3.3% to 6.6% by 2030. Page 700 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 15 Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works Department. They support replacement of concrete curb and gutter, as well as replacement of deficient watermain components (including fire hydrants, gate valves and water services). They also recommend replacement of existing CMP storm sewer within the project area. Police and Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire Departments. The Fire Department supports watermain improvements, including adding fire hydrants as necessary to meet public safety standards. They noted that temporary fire hydrants should be consistent in style for ease of access, that emergency access should always be maintained during construction and that drive widths and turnarounds should meet local design guidelines. Parks and Recreation A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. They support improvements that promote non-motorized transportation to and from Arden Park but expressed concern about parking and traffic impacts during construction, as the park amenities are heavily used from early spring to late summer. Engineering staff will include Parks and Recreation in discussions about final design and will communicate with them before and during construction to minimize impacts to park facilities. Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on October 24, 2024, a draft engineering study was provided for review. Relevant minutes from the ETC meeting is included in Appendix G. An advisory communication to the City Council prepared by the ETC is included in Appendix H. City of Hopkins City of Edina staff met with City of Hopkins staff in June 2024 to discuss the project limits and the proposed scope of work. Hopkins staff had no concerns with the proposed improvements within or immediately adjacent to their city limits. Edina staff agreed to continue communicating with Hopkins staff and property owners on project updates during the design, bidding and construction phases of the project. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, virtual neighborhood informational presentations were posted on Better Together Edina in September 2022, and October 2023. Residents were invited to an informational presentation and were able to directly ask questions to staff in September 2024. Residents were notified of a recorded video version of the September 2024 informational presentation posted on the Better Together Edina website, where residents were able to ask questions to staff from the Better Together Edina website, as well as telephone and email. Materials from the virtual presentation can be found in Appendix I. Page 701 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 16 On July 16, 2024, residents in Presidents A and B were asked to complete a questionnaire, soliciting feedback on motorized and non-motorized transportation, and local drainage problems within the project area. Unique feedback was requested on potential support of sidewalks or bikeways on each street. The questionnaire was completed by 46 of 301 property owners, a return rate of 15%. The following is a summary of feedback received from residents:  20 of 46 (44%) were concerned or very concerned with the speed of traffic in the neighborhood; 26 (56%) were not concerned.  17 of 45 (38%) were concerned or very concerned with motorist behavior in the neighborhood; 28 (62%) were not concerned.  16 of 44 (36%) identified an unsafe intersection within the neighborhood.  37 of 46 (80%) walk, run, or jog in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week.  7 of 45 (16%) ride a bicycle in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week.  8 of 44 (17%) reported parking on the street at least 2-3 times per week; 31 (71%) reported parking on the street less than once per month.  6 of 46 (13%) reported having issues with drainage in the neighborhood. Unique feedback was requested on potential support of sidewalks or bikeways on each street on the same July 16 survey. The following is a summary of this feedback received from residents:  27 of 46 (59%) supported a sidewalk on Belmore Lane (22 individuals, plus 5 in support of sidewalks on all streets)  16 of 46 (35%) supported a bikeway on Belmore Lane (15 individuals, plus 1 in support of bikeways on all streets)  22 of 46 (48%) supported a sidewalk on Washington Avenue (17 individuals, plus 5 in support of sidewalks on all streets)  19 of 46 (41%) supported a bikeway on Washington Avenue (18 individuals, plus 1 in support of bikeways on all streets)  13 of 46 (28%) supported a sidewalk on Monroe Avenue (8 individuals, plus 5 in support of sidewalks on all streets)  3 of 46 (7%) supported a bikeway on Monroe Avenue (2 individuals, plus 1 in support of bikeways on all streets)  The remaining streets had less than 20% support for sidewalks or bikeways. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys The full questionnaires and responses can be found in Appendix J. Relevant correspondence from residents regarding the project can be found in Appendix K. Page 702 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 17 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of Engineering, Public Works and other City staff. The proposed improvements also align with the Budget Work Plan values and goals developed by the City Council and staff. Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadways are proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing bituminous pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadway where feasible. A minimum of 8” of aggregate base material will be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement of 2.5” of bituminous non-wear and 1.5” of bituminous wear course. Washington Avenue will be evaluated for a thicker pavement and aggregate section pending a supplemental traffic study. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. Significant subgrade removals may occur where areas of clay soils are present. The reconstructed sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20-year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. All roadways within the project area are designated as Local Streets in the Living Streets Plan. Per this plan’s design guidelines, Local Streets have a typical width of 27’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb) without sidewalks or 24’ with an 8’ shared-use path or 5’ sidewalk on one side. Parking Per the Living Streets Plan, on-street parking should be evaluated based on classification, adjacent land uses, existing demand and costs of construction and maintenance. One-sided parking is proposed on 3rd Street, Belmore Lane, Monroe Avenue and Washington Avenue due to the proposed multi-modal facilities (see multi- modal facilities below). Given the existing demand for parking, staff believes that parking changes should not occur on any other streets in the project area. The existing and proposed roadway widths, sidewalks, shared-use paths and parking recommendations for local streets that vary from the Living Streets Plan guidelines are shown in Figures 7 through 11. The existing and proposed roadway widths, and parking recommendations that meet the guidelines are shown in Appendix L. The existing and proposed roadway widths, sidewalks and parking recommendations are also shown in Table 2. Page 703 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 18 Figure 7: Washington Avenue (facing north) Figure 8: Belmore Lane (facing east) Page 704 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 19 Figure 9: Monroe Ave (facing north) Figure 10: 3rd Street (facing east) Page 705 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 20 Figure 11: Adams Avenue, Harrison Avenue, Jackson Avenue, Jefferson Avenue, Madison Avenue, Tyler Avenue, Tyler Court and Van Buren Avenue Street Existing Roadway Width (face to face), feet Proposed Roadway Width (face to face), feet Pedestrian / Bikeway Width, feet Boulevard Width, feet Parking 3rd Street 30 24 Ex. shared- use path 0 South Side only Belmore Lane 30 24 8’ shared- use path 0-5 North side only Monroe Avenue 30 24 5’ sidewalk 3-5 East side only Washington Avenue 30 24 8’ shared- use path 0-5 East side only Adams Avenue Harrison Avenue Jackson Avenue Jefferson Avenue Madison Avenue Tyler Avenue Tyler Court Van Buren Avenue 30 27 - - Two-sided Table 2: Street Widths, Sidewalks and Parking Page 706 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 21 Alleys It is proposed to install bituminous pavement on the gravel alley south of Belmore Lane between Washington Avenue and Adams Avenue within the project area to improve maintenance operations and reconstruct the bituminous alley north of Belmore Lane between Jefferson Avenue and Madison Avenue within the project area due to poor pavement and subgrade condition. Minor drainage improvements will be completed by grade adjustments of the gravel and pavement. Based on their current condition, no repairs are proposed for the remaining bituminous alleys. Roadway Signage All traffic signage within the project area, including street name blades, will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix E). All new signs will conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Multi-Modal Transportation Staff seeks to balance the recommendations of the City’s guiding documents (Living Streets Plan, Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan and Climate Action Plan), feedback from affected residents, available right-of-way and potential tree and infrastructure impacts. Figure 12 shows all existing and proposed pedestrian facilities (also detailed in Table 2 above). Figure 12: Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Mixed Use Facilities Page 707 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 22 Staff is proposing a new sidewalk on the east side of Monroe Avenue from Maloney Avenue to 2nd Street. This sidewalk is recommended in the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. The benefits of this sidewalk include:  Connection to existing and proposed multi-modal facilities on 2nd Street, 3rd Street, Monroe Avenue, Belmore Lane and Maloney Avenue  Improving access to Alden Park and Harley Hopkins Park  Improving access to Harley Hopkins Family Center and Downtown Hopkins  Improving access to Metro Transit Route 612 and Green Line Extension While the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan recommends a sidewalk and bike lanes on Washington Avenue from Maloney Avenue to 3rd Street, there is not sufficient room to accommodate both facilities and maintain on-street parking. Therefore, staff is proposing to combine these facilities into one shared-use path on the east side. The benefits of this facility include:  Connection to existing and proposed multi-modal facilities on 3rd Street, Belmore Lane, Maloney Avenue and Lincoln Drive  Improving access to Van Valkenburg Park  Improving access to Downtown Hopkins  Improving access to Metro Transit Green Line Extension Staff is also proposing a new shared-use path on the north side of Belmore Lane from Washington Avenue to Dearborn Court (project limits). This facility is not included in the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. The benefits of this facility include:  Connection to existing and proposed multi-modal facilities on Washington Avenue, Monroe Avenue and in Alden Park  Improving access to Alden Park and Harley Hopkins Park  Improving access to Harley Hopkins Family Center and Downtown Hopkins  Improving access to Metro Transit Route 612 and Green Line Extension Locations were selected by staff based on existing topography, connections to existing facilities and private utility conflicts. The grass boulevards that will separate the new curb and the proposed sidewalks and shared-use paths are proposed to be 5’-wide but may vary depending on construction conflicts. Separation from vehicle traffic creates a more pedestrian-friendly environment and is preferred by Public Works for snow storage. The extra width needed for the sidewalks, shared- use paths and boulevards will be balanced between both sides of the street, where feasible. All adjacent pedestrian curb ramps will be reconstructed to meet the current design standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and portions of the existing sidewalks will be reconstructed as necessary. The proposed shared-use path on Belmore Lane between Monroe Avenue and Van Buren Avenue will be maintained by the City as it is adjacent to Alden Park. The Page 708 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 23 remaining shared-use paths and sidewalk will be maintained by adjacent property owners as they are not within state or county right-of-way, along Municipal State Aid routes, or included in the City’s Active Routes to School Plan. Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer main has been televised, and portions will be repaired using a combination of open cut and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) methods. These repairs will address the issues of sags, cracks and groundwater infiltration into the sewer main. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Watermain Echologics, LLC was hired by the City to perform a non-invasive pipe condition assessment on the watermain within the project area, and staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed. All the existing watermain, except for the 16” CIP in Arden Park to Water Treatment Plant No. 4, will be replaced using a combination of pipe bursting, lining and open cut methods. A segment of 12” CIP outside the project area along Maloney Avenue between Jackson Avenue and Van Buren Avenues will be evaluated for potential replacement using a combination of open cut and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) methods. Water service leads and gate valves will be replaced as well. All gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced and, if needed, additional hydrants will be installed to meet current public safety standards. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fittings desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. As part of the City’s Wellhead Protection Plan, staff plans to engage property owners who have unsealed private wells and encourage them to have them properly sealed. Storm Sewer Based on the scope of utility work, concrete curb and gutter will be replaced throughout the project, providing a continuous, functional conduit for stormwater. The storm sewer network will have modifications to resolve existing drainage issues at various locations throughout the neighborhood. Some of the existing structures will be removed and replaced due to their poor condition. CMP pipe is proposed to be replaced as necessary. Sump drains will be installed where feasible to allow property owners to connect their sump pump discharges directly into the storm sewer system. Staff will engage in further discussions with Barr Engineering to determine whether to consider: 1. Install an infiltration system on Belmore Lane between Washington Avenue and Adams Avenue. 2. Increasing the Belmore Lane storm sewer pipe size between Washington Avenue and Monroe Avenue. Page 709 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 24 3. Increasing the Tyler Court storm sewer pipe size. 4. Reducing flood risk exposure to primary structures with fiscally responsible options, including storm sewer pipe and / or raising or lowering roadway elevations. Private Utilities Staff will meet with representatives of several private utility companies in December 2024, to discuss the proposed 2025 reconstruction project and preliminary improvements. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed later with minimal disturbance using trenchless technologies. The lighting in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the intersections; therefore, staff are recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. RIGHT-OF-WAY/ EASEMENTS: Existing roadway right-of-way in this neighborhood is 60’ except for Tyler Avenue where it is 66’ and Washington Avenue and Tyler Court which are 50’. It is anticipated that most of this project can be constructed within the existing ROW. Half of the ROW for 3rd Street is located within the City of Hopkins. While a portion of Washington Avenue ROW is also located within the City of Hopkins, no roadway infrastructure is in the Hopkins ROW. Staff is preparing a cooperative agreement with the City of Hopkins for proposed work that occurs within Hopkins ROW. The cooperative agreement will detail each agency’s responsibilities regarding construction, cost allocation, ownership, and future maintenance. A ROW permit from the Minnesota Department of Transportation may be required for roadway and / or utility work adjacent to the noise wall on Washington Avenue. Many properties have retaining walls, fences, vegetation, boulders or other landscaped items within the right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with some of the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed to complete the necessary work. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $17,617,560 (see Table 3). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. Page 710 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 25 Item Amount Total Cost Funding Source Roadway – City of Edina $2,524,960 Special Assessments Gravel Alley $11,700 Special Assessments Roadway and Alley $2,169,000 Property Taxes Roadway – City of Hopkins $123,800 City of Hopkins Roadway Total: $4,829,460 Sanitary Sewer $1,143,900 Watermain $4,667,900 Storm Sewer $6,726,100 Utility Total: $12,537,900 City Utility Funds Sidewalk Total: $250,200 PACS Fund Project Total: $17,617,560 Table 3: Estimated Project Costs ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statutes. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 293.6 roadway residential equivalent units (REUs) in the Presidents A/B project area. The estimated assessment per REU is $8,600 (see Figure 13). The preliminary assessment roll can be found in Appendix M. Page 711 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 26 Figure 13: Preliminary Roadway Assessment Map All single-family residential properties located entirely within the project area receive an assessment of 1 REU, except for the properties shown in the tables below. There are 24 single-family residential properties located in the project limits that have been previously assessed a partial REU or are corner lots with an adjacent street that will be assessed with a future project. Tables 4 and 5 show their REU calculations based on the City’s assessment policy. Table 4: Single-Family Residential Corner Properties with Future Additional Assessment PID House Number Street Type of Property Proposed REU REU Factor Assessable REU 3011721210001 6651 2ND ST Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210002 6655 2ND ST Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721120094 6528 BELMORE LA Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210004 299 MONROE AVE Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721120075 401 TYLER AVE Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210003 298 VAN BUREN AVE Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 Page 712 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 27 Table 5: Previously Assessed Single-Family Residential Corner Properties There are 7 multi-family residential properties located within the project limits. Table 6 shows their REU calculations based on the City’s assessment policy. PID House Number Street Previous Project Proposed REU REU Factor Assessable REU 3011721220080 422 ADAMS AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721220103 425 ADAMS AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210124 424 HARRISON AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210145 425 HARRISON AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210078 424 JACKSON AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210102 425 JACKSON AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721220102 424 JEFFERSON AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721220122 425 JEFFERSON AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721220121 424 MADISON AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721220142 425 MADISON AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721220141 424 MONROE AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210155 425 MONROE AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721120079 421 TYLER AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210144 424 TYLER AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721240012 500 TYLER CT Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721130002 501 TYLER CT Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210101 424 VAN BUREN AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 3011721210125 425 VAN BUREN AVE Maloney Ave – 1995 1 0.5 0.5 Page 713 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 28 PID House Number Street Type of Property Proposed REU REU Factor Assessable REU 3011721220070 301 WASHINGTON AVE Multi-Family (2 units) 1 0.8 1.6 3011721220069 307 WASHINGTON AVE Multi-Family (2 units) 1 0.8 1.6 3011721220068 309 WASHINGTON AVE Multi-Family (2 units) 1 0.8 1.6 3011721220067 313 WASHINGTON AVE Multi-Family (2 units) 1 0.8 1.6 3011721220066 317 WASHINGTON AVE Multi-Family (2 units) 1 0.8 1.6 3011721220083 417 WASHINGTON AVE Multi-Family (2 units) 1 0.8 1.6 3011721220082 421 WASHINGTON AVE Multi-Family (2 units) 1 0.8 1.6 Table 6: Multi-Family Property There is one multi-family residential property located in the project limits that has been previously assessed a partial REU and is a corner lots. Table 7 shows their REU calculations based on the City’s assessment policy. PID House Number Street Type of Property Proposed REU REU Factor Assessable REU 3011721220156 6940 MALONEY AVE Multi-Family (2 units) / Corner lot 0.5 0.8 0.5 Table 7: Previously Assessed Multi-family Residential Corner Property There are two city owned properties located within the project limits. Table 8 shows their REU calculations based on the City’s current assessment policy. Table 8: City-Owned Properties PID House Number Street Type of Property Proposed REU REU Factor Assessable REU 3011721210005 24 Address Unassigned Lot north of 301 Harrison Avenue 1 1.0 1.0 3011721210060 6750 BELMORE LA Alden Park ; Potential development of 4 lots with current zoning restrictions. 4.0 Page 714 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 29 Alley Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 9 REUs adjacent to the gravel alley. The estimated assessment per alley REU is $1,300 (see Figure 14). Figure 14: Preliminary Gravel Alley Assessment Map PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule outlines the past and future tasks to be performed related to the project: Neighborhood Informational Video Presentations (all 2023 and Future projects) September 2022, October 2023 Neighborhood Informational Open House September 24, 2024 ETC Engineering Study Review October 24, 2024 Receive Engineering Study December 9, 2024 Open Public Improvement Hearing December 9, 2024 Close Public Improvement Hearing December 11, 2024 Public Improvement Hearing Council Decision December 17, 2024 Bid Opening March/April 2025 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2025 Complete Construction Fall 2025 Final Assessment Hearing October 2026 Page 715 of 1086 Engineering Study Presidents A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-466 December 2, 2024 30 RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the project can be completed during the 2025 construction season, assuming an efficient replacement of gas main and services schedule by CenterPoint Energy. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure in the Presidents A/B neighborhood. APPENDIX: A. Traffic and Crash Data B. Comprehensive Plan Update – Pedestrian Facilities C. Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities D. Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks E. Street Lights and Signs F. Living Streets Plan G. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes H. Edina Transportation Commission Advisory Communication I. Neighborhood Informational Presentation Materials J. Resident Questionnaire K. Correspondence from Residents L. Proposed Typical Sections M. Preliminary Assessment Roll Page 716 of 1086 APPENDIX A Traffic and Crash Data Page 717 of 1086 TraƯic Count Location Month / Year ADT 85% Speed 1 June 2024 2748 38.9 2 June 2012 / July 2012 252 / 186 30.6 / 30.8 3 May 2008 669 34.6 4 April 2014 463 33.4 5 June 2024 482 28.5 6 June 2024 143 26.8 Accident Location Month / Year Crash Type Notes 97 September 2017 3 car crash Northbound vehicle rear-ended a parked car into another 98 September 2021 Two car crash Construction trailer parking on eastbound side of road rear-ended by driver due to sun impacting visibility. 99 October 2023 Vehicle failure Westbound vehicle tire broke then hit 2 vehicles parked on street. Page 718 of 1086 APPENDIX B City Comprehensive Plan Update – Pedestrian Facilities Map Page 719 of 1086 TRACY AVEVERNON AVEWOODDALE AVEHANSEN RD70TH ST W FRANCE AVE SVALLEYVIEWRDMINNESOT ADRGLEASONRDWeberPark EdinaCommunityCenter HighlandsPark CityHall M innehahaCree kNineMileCree kNine Mile Creek ArdenPark SouthdaleLibrary ToddPark YanceyPark Van ValkenburgPark BredesenPark PamelaPark RoslandPark Fred RichardsPark BraemarGolfCourse LewisPark PublicWorks ArnesonAcresPark EdinaHighSchool CentennialLakes LakeCornelia LakeEdina MudLake IndianheadLake ArrowheadLake MirrorLake MelodyLake BraemarArena Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadBLAKE RDSCHAEFER RDVERNON AVECAHILL RD66TH ST W YORK AVE SINTERLACHEN BLVD MALONEY AVE 44TH ST W 50TH ST W 54TH ST W 58TH ST W 70TH ST W 76TH ST W DEWEY HILL RD VALLEY VIE W R D VALLEY VIEW RD 78TH ST W October 2022 City of EdinaExisting and Proposed Pedestrian Facilities ± 0 2,250Feet Legend Proposed CP Rail Regional TrailNine Mile Creek Regional Trail Existing Shared-Use Path Existing Sidewalk Proposed Shared-Use Path Proposed Sidewalk Proposed Twin Loops Page 720 of 1086 APPENDIX C City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities Map Page 721 of 1086 TRACY AVEVERNON AVEWOODDALE AVEHANSEN RD70TH ST W FRANCE AVE SVALLEYVIEWRDMINNESOT ADRGLEASONRDWeberPark EdinaCommunityCenter HighlandsPark CityHall M innehahaCree k NineMileCreek Ni ne Mile Cre ek ArdenPark SouthdaleLibrary ToddPark YanceyPark Van ValkenburgPark BredesenPark PamelaPark RoslandPark Fred RichardsPark BraemarGolfCourse LewisPark PublicWorks ArnesonAcresPark EdinaHighSchool CentennialLakes LakeCornelia LakeEdina MudLake IndianheadLake ArrowheadLake MirrorLake MelodyLake BraemarArena Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadBLAKE RDSCHAEFER RDVERNON AVECAHILL RD66TH ST W YORK AVE SINTERLACHEN BLVD MALONEY AVE 44TH ST W 50TH ST W 54TH ST W 58TH ST W 70TH ST W 76TH ST W DEWEY HILL RD VALLEY VIE W R D VALLEY VIEW RD 78TH ST W October 2022 City of EdinaExisting and Proposed Bicycle Facilities ± 0 2,250Feet Legend Proposed CP Rail Regional TrailNine Mile Creek Regional Trail Existing Shared-Use Path Proposed Shared-Use Path Proposed Twin Loops Advisory Bike Lane Existing Bike Boulevard Bikeable Shoulder Existing Shared Bike Lane Existing Bike Lane Existing Buffered Bike Lane Proposed Bike Boulevard Proposed Bike Lane Proposed Buffered Bike Lane Page 722 of 1086 APPENDIX D Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks Page 723 of 1086 6901 520 306 300 307 6707 412 6528 6521 6525 6520 308 609 508 406 408 407 516 605 304 516 524 532 305 6512 309 24 422 308 304 301 6521 317 404 411 315 408 512 316 323 407 415 303 322 401 308 308 312 314 419 302 510 322 306 313 320 504 309 299 300 311 414 6624 425 6612 312 419418 401 304 300 513 421 400 301-03 6615 6512 298 310 505 409 6615 417-19 305 408 500 313-15 420 501 421-23 509 309-11 613 302 312 417 300 323 305-07 500 301 410408 317-19 314 6517 416 420 304 318319 308 318 422 411 415 321 315 406 6600312315 301 411 405 409 316 405 314 304 311 319 306 413 308 317 401 306 424 317 425 301 305 307 404 401 414 418 422 408 421 412 407 411 423 423 419 305 405 6616 400 424 323 413 415 323 419 411 422 406 311 411 415 315 540 425 404 415 419 404 410 413 309 414 405 423 301 403 424 410 419 409 412 305 411 418 414 409 420 6601 404 410 409 416 313 402 409 416 317 423 401 416 407 6606414 414 408 418 411 319 404 415 418 412 420 402 418 425 416 303 416 400 408 415 408 403 417 409 421 422 424 400 415 301 319 405 401 6605423 6609309 400 323 424425 303 417 318 305 311 419 320 6655 402 322 425 423422 310 314316315 304 6651 417 310 412 302 318 306 318 320 404 405 400 409 306 312 308 316 404 414 314 402402 317 406 400 405 416 424 300 319 300 421 302 306 424 403 308 317 420 320 311 300 322 405 313 309 300 321 401 401 403 315 404 322 407 425 305 307 323 406406 325 307 403 6721 69406938 6750 306 6528 517 Project Limits BELMORE LN MALONEY AVE ALDEN PARK 3RD ST S +¡ 2ND ST S WASHINGTON AVE SADAMS AVEJEFFERSON AVEMADISON AVEMONROE AVEJACKSON AVEVAN BUREN AVEHARRISON AVETYLER AVETYLER CTCity of HopkinsCity of Edina / Engineering DeptNovember 2024 Sewer Blockage and Watermain BreaksPresidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway and Alley ReconstructionCITYOFEDINAMINNESOTAINCORPORATED 1888 , e Legend Sewer Blockages Watermain Breaks Page 724 of 1086 APPENDIX E Street Lights and Signs Page 725 of 1086 kjkj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kjkj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kjkj kj kj kj kj kj 6901 520 306 300 307 6707 412 6528 6521 6525 6520 308 609 508 406 408 407 516 605 304 516 524 532 305 6512 309 24 422 308 304 301 6521 317 404 411 315 408 512 316 323 407 415 303 322 401 308 308 312 314 419 302 510 322 306 313 320 504 309 299 300 311 414 6624 425 6612 312 419418 401 304 300 513 421 400 301-03 6615 6512 298 310 505 409 6615 417-19 305 408 500 313-15 420 501 421-23 509 309-11 613 302 312 417 300 323 305-07 500 301 410408 317-19 314 6517 416 420 304 318319 308 318 422 411 415 321 315 406 6600312315 301 411 405 409 316 405 314 304 311 319 306 413 308 317 401 306 424 317 425 301 305 307 404 401 414 418 422 408 421 412 407 411 423 423 419 305 405 6616 400 424 323 413 415 323 419 411 422 406 311 411 415 315 540 425 404 415 419 404 410 413 309 414 405 423 301 403 424 410 419 409 412 305 411 418 414 409 420 6601 404 410 409 416 313 402 409 416 317 423 401 416 407 6606414 414 408 418 411 319 404 415 418 412 420 402 418 425 416 303 416 400 408 415 408 403 417 409 421 422 424 400 415 301 319 405 401 6605423 6609309 400 323 424425 303 417 318 305 311 419 320 6655 402 322 425 423422 310 314316315 304 6651 417 310 412 302 318 306 318 320 404 405 400 409 306 312 308 316 404 414 314 402402 317 406 400 405 416 424 300 319 300 421 302 306 424 403 308 317 420 320 311 300 322 405 313 309 300 321 401 401 403 315 404 322 407 425 305 307 323 406406 325 307 403 6721 69406938 6750 306 6528 517 Project Limits BELMORE LN MALONEY AVE ALDEN PARK 3RD ST S +¡ 2ND ST S WASHINGTON AVE SADAMS AVEJEFFERSON AVEMADISON AVEMONROE AVEJACKSON AVEVAN BUREN AVEHARRISON AVETYLER AVETYLER CTCity of HopkinsCity of Edina 13 14 902 903 756 757 647 985 648 751 752 984 336 115 3781 3780 3779 3778 3649 3277 32233222 3221 32203219 1676 1677 13181353 1351 1352 1690 1685 1684 1683 1682 / Engineering DeptNovember 2024 Existing Street LightsPresidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway and Alley ReconstructionCITYOFEDINAMINNESOTAINCORPORATED 1888 , e kj Existing Street Lights Page 726 of 1086 !"$!"$!"$!"$!"$!"$ !"$-./0-./0 !"$!"$!"$ !"$ 89:| -./0-./0 !"$89:| !"$ FGHZ!"$-./0!"$-./0!"$-./0!"$-./0 89:|!"$!"$!"$!"$1234 !"$!"$!"$!"$!"$-./0!"$-./0 1238 ª«¬¯±² ª«¬¯±² 1238 !"$!"$!"$!"$!"$!"$ !"$!"$ 1238 bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf 1238 bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpf1238bcdpfbcdpf 89:{ !"$!"$!"$ %&'( !"$ !"$!"$!"$ 89:{bcdpf 89:?6901 520 306 300 307 6707 412 6528 6521 6525 6520 308 609 508 406 408 407 516 605 304 516 524 532 305 6512 309 24 422 308 304 301 6521 317 404 411 315 408 512 316 323 407 415 303 322 401 308 308 312 314 419 302 510 322 306 313 320 504 309 299 300 311 414 6624 425 6612 312 419418 401 304 300 513 421 400 301-03 6615 6512 298 310 505 409 6615 417-19 305 408 500 313-15 420 501 421-23 509 309-11 613 302 312 417 300 323 305-07 500 301 410408 317-19 314 6517 416 420 304 318319 308 318 422 411 415 321 315 406 6600312315 301 411 405 409 316 405 314 304 311 319 306 413 308 317 401 306 424 317 425 301 305 307 404 401 414 418 422 408 421 412 407 411 423 423 419 305 405 6616 400 424 323 413 415 323 419 411 422 406 311 411 415 315 540 425 404 415 419 404 410 413 309 414 405 423 301 403 424 410 419 409 412 305 411 418 414 409 420 6601 404 410 409 416 313 402 409 416 317 423 401 416 407 6606414 414 408 418 411 319 404 415 418 412 420 402 418 425 416 303 416 400 408 415 408 403 417 409 421 422 424 400 415 301 319 405 401 6605423 6609309 400 323 424425 303 417 318 305 311 419 320 6655 402 322 425 423422 310 314316315 304 6651 417 310 412 302 318 306 318 320 404 405 400 409 306 312 308 316 404 414 314 402402 317 406 400 405 416 424 300 319 300 421 302 306 424 403 308 317 420 320 311 300 322 405 313 309 300 321 401 401 403 315 404 322 407 425 305 307 323 406406 325 307 403 6721 69406938 6750 306 6528 517 Project Limits BELMORE LN MALONEY AVE ALDEN PARK 3RD ST S +¡ 2ND ST S WASHINGTON AVE SADAMS AVEJEFFERSON AVEMADISON AVEMONROE AVEJACKSON AVEVAN BUREN AVEHARRISON AVETYLER AVETYLER CTCity of HopkinsCity of Edina / Engineering DeptNovember 2024 Existing SignsPresidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway and Alley ReconstructionCITYOFEDINAMINNESOTAINCORPORATED 1888 , e Page 727 of 1086 APPENDIX F Living Streets Plan Page 728 of 1086 Living Streets Plan 2015 Safety Health Choice Economy Page 729 of 1086 8 2. Living Streets Policy INTRODUCTION The Living Streets Policy was developed to provide the framework for a Living Streets Plan. The policy initially stood alone and included sections to guide the creation of the Living Street Plan. This revised policy is now an integral part of the Living Streets Plan. The Living Streets Policy ties directly to key community goals outlined in the City’s 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Those goals include safe walking, bicycling and driving; reduced storm water runoff, reduced energy consumption, and promoting health. The Living Streets Policy also compliments voluntary City initiatives such the “do.town” effort related to community health, Tree City USA and the Green Step Cities programs related to sustainability. In other cases, the Living Streets Policy will assist the City in meeting mandatory requirements set by other agencies. The Living Streets Policy is broken up into three parts: Vision, Principles and Implementation. The Policy is followed by a description of core services provided by the City of Edina that are related to or implemented in part through Living Streets. POLICY Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. The Living Streets Policy defines Edina’s vision for Living Streets, the principles Living Streets will embody, and the plan that will guide implementation of their construction. LIVING STREETS VISION Edina is a place where ... • Transportation utilizing all modes is equally safe and accessible; • Residents and families regularly choose to walk or bike; • Streets enhance neighborhood character and community identity; • Streets are safe, inviting places that encourage human interaction and physical activity; • Public policy strives to promote sustainability through balanced infrastructure investments; • Environmental stewardship and reduced energy consumption are pursued in public and private sectors alike; and • Streets support vibrant commerce and add to the value of adjacent land uses. Mini Fact Expect cyclists on the road. Watch for cyclists on the road. Treat them as you would any slow-moving vehicle. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy Page 730 of 1086 9 LIVING STREETS PRINCIPLES Fifteen principles guide implementation of the Living Streets Policy in the areas of all users and all modes, connectivity, context sensitivity and sustainability. The City will incorporate these principles when planning for and designing the local transportation network and when making public and private land use decisions. All Users and All Modes Principle 1: Living Streets are high-quality transportation facilities that meet the needs of the most vulnerable users such as pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors and the disabled; and Principle 2: Living Streets provide access and mobility for all transportation modes while enhancing safety and convenience for all users. Connectivity Principle 3: The City designs, operates and maintains a transportation system that provides a highly connected network of streets that accommodate all modes of travel; Principle 4: The City seeks opportunities to overcome barriers to active transportation by preserving and repurposing existing rights-of-way and adding new rights- of-way to enhance connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit; Principle 5: The City prioritizes improvements to non-motorized connections to key destinations such as public facilities, public transit, the regional transportation network and commercial areas; Principle 6: The City will require new developments to provide interconnected street and sidewalk networks that connect to existing or planned streets or sidewalks on the perimeter of the development; and Principle 7: Projects will include consideration of the logical termini by mode. For example, the logical termini for a bike lane or sidewalk may extend beyond the traditional limits of a street construction or reconstruction project, in order to ensure multimodal connectivity and continuity. Context Sensitivity Principle 8: Living Streets are developed with input from stakeholders and designed to consider neighborhood character and promote a strong sense of place; Principle 9: Living Streets preserve and protect natural features such as waterways, urban forest, sensitive slopes and soils; Principle 10: Living Streets are designed and built with coordination between business and property owners along commercial corridors to develop vibrant commercial districts; Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy Page 731 of 1086 10 Principle 11: Living Streets coordinate with regional transit networks and regional authorities; and Principle 12: The City will consider the fiscal context of projects and potential financial impacts when implementing Living Streets at the project level. Sustainability Principle 13: Living Streets will improve the current and future quality of life of the public, Principle 14: Living Streets will reduce environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of roadways; and Principle 15: The City will increase the life span and resilience of its infrastructure and will build infrastructure with consideration for lifecycle costs and ease of maintenance. LIVING STREETS IMPLEMENTATION The City of Edina will develop Living Streets in the regular course of business of maintaining, expanding or redeveloping the road network and will be guided by the Vision and Principles established above. Implementation will happen predominantly through the neighborhood street reconstruction program, but also though specific stand-alone stormwater utility, pedestrian, bicycle or safety projects. Project prioritization is not specifically part of the Living Streets Plan. Prioritization of projects takes place in the City’s Capital Improvement Program and Budget and is determined by the City Council with guidance from the Living Streets Vision and Principles. The City will actively promote and apply the Living Streets Policy and Plan by: • Applying the Living Streets Policy and Plan to all street projects, including those involving operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation or changes in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. This also includes privately built roads, sidewalks, paths and trails. • Drawing on all sources of transportation funding and actively pursuing grants, cost-sharing opportunities and other new or special funding sources as applicable. • Through all City departments supporting the vision and principles outlined in this Plan in their work. • By acting as an advocate for Living Streets principles when a local transportation or land use decision is under the jurisdiction of another agency. Projects that implement Living Streets will be guided by pedestrian and cyclist network plans and roadway classifications and will consider the physical, social, ecologic, regulatory and economic context in a given project area. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy Page 732 of 1086 11 The project delivery system used to build Living Streets will: • Systematically engage Edina residents and project stakeholders to better inform project-level recommendations. • Keep Edina residents and project stakeholders informed about Living Streets and the range of services they help provide. • Follow minimum Living Streets design requirements and standards. • Manage construction impacts to residents and users of streets. Network The creation of a Living Streets network of road, pedestrian and bicycle facilities provides mobility, accessibility and access to people, places and spaces. The resulting interconnection of neighborhoods links people to goods and services and to one another, and increases quality of life for those who live in, work in, or visit the city. Existing and planned transportation networks are identified in the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan and other approved/adopted plans. Network plans include: • Roadway Network (Functional Classification, Jurisdictional Classification) • Sidewalk Facilities • Bicycle Facilities (Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan) • Active Routes to School Comprehensive Plan • Transit Service Network plans are approved by the City Council. In most cases, modification requires an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan. The expansion, creation and improvement of pedestrian and bicycle networks will be well planned and prioritized: • Expansion of existing networks and providing connections to key traffic generators or destinations provide immediate benefit to all network users and is a top priority. • Network connections serving vulnerable users such as children, seniors and the disabled are a top priority. • Network connections serving high-volume uses such as schools, retail destinations or regional public transit are a top priority. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy Page 733 of 1086 12 Context Contextual variety can either constrain or create opportunity in roadway and other infrastructure projects. The following are contexts that will be considered and will influence the planning, design and implementation of Living Streets. Exceptions Living Streets principles will be included in all street construction, reconstruction, repaving and rehabilitation projects, except under one or more of the conditions listed below. City staff will document proposed exceptions as part of a project proposal. • A project involves only ordinary maintenance activities designed to keep assets in serviceable condition, such as mowing, cleaning, sweeping, spot repair, concrete joint repair or pothole filling, or when interim measures are implemented on a temporary detour. Such maintenance activities, however, shall consider and meet the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. CONTEXTS OF LIVING STREETS Ecological Water resource, ponds, wetlands, lakes, streams Natural resouces, trees, and urban forest Air quality Climate Sun and shade Materials, waste, energy, sustainability Regulatory State Aid roadway Watershed rules Operational Maintenance operations Traffic control or functional constraints Project Type Public Neighborhood street reconstruction Neighborhood street reconstruction with major associated utility work State Aid street reconstruction Stand-alone sidewalk, bicycle or utility project Public partner lead State County Transit agency Parks district Private development Will remain private Future public Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy Page 734 of 1086 13 • The City exempts a project due to an excessively disproportionate cost of establishing a bikeway, walkway or transit enhancement as part of a project. • The City determines that the construction is not practically feasible or cost effective because of significant or adverse environmental impacts to waterways, flood plains, remnants or native vegetation, wetlands or other critical areas. • Available budget is constrained or project timing allows more efficient construction at a later date. Engagement Members of the public have an interest in understanding and providing input for public projects. Project recommendations will be developed with a transparent and defined level of public engagement. The public will have access to the decision-making process and decision makers via public meetings and other correspondence and will be provided the opportunity to give input throughout the process. Project reports will discuss how their input helped to influence recommendations and decisions. The City of Edina’s Living Streets will continue to engage and solicit public input as a vital component of the project implementation process. See Chapter 5 for a more detailed discussion regarding the purpose of and opportunities for public engagement. Design The guidelines contained in the Living Streets Plan will be used to direct the planning, funding, design, construction, operation and maintenance of new and modified streets, sidewalks, paths and trails. The guidelines allow for context-sensitive designs. The Design Guidelines (see Chapter 6): • Keep street pavement widths to the minimum necessary. • Provide well-designed pedestrian accommodation in the form of sidewalks or shared-use pathways on all arterial, collector and local connector streets. Sidewalks shall also be required where streets abut a public school, public building, community playfield or neighborhood park. Termini will be determined by context. • Provide frequent, convenient and safe street crossings. These may be at intersections designed to be pedestrian friendly, or at mid-block locations where needed and appropriate. • Provide bicycle accommodation on all primary bike routes. • Allocate right-of-way for boulevards. • Allocate right-of-way for parking only when necessary and not in conflict with Living Streets principles. • Consider streets as part of our natural ecosystem and incorporate landscaping, trees, rain gardens and other features to improve air and water quality. The Design Guidelines in this Plan will be incorporated into other City plans, manuals, rules, regulations and programs as appropriate. As new and better practices evolve, the City will update this Living Streets Plan. Minimum standards will guide how vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle networks interact and share public right of way. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy Page 735 of 1086 14 Benchmarks and Performance Measures The ability to measure the performance of a plan, as well as knowing that it is functioning as it is intended, is vitally important to overall success and the ability to sustain it. With this in mind, the City will monitor and measure its performance relative to the Living Streets Policy. Benchmarks that will demonstrate success include: Every street and neighborhood is a comfortable place for walking and bicycling. This does not mean that every street in the city will have walking and biking facilities. It means that each neighborhood will provide a network of these facilities such that walking and biking to and through neighborhoods is a comfortable experience. Every child can walk or bike to school or a park safely. It is essential that alternatives to driving to school or parks be provided to children and their caregivers. These alternatives – walking or bicycling – will be both safe and convenient modes of transportation. See the Edina Active Routes to School Plan for more information. Seniors, children, and disabled people can cross all streets safely and comfortably. Opportunities to cross all streets in Edina, including local, collectors and arterial streets, will be provided. These crossings will be safe and comfortable for all users, regardless of age or ability. An active way of life is available to all. Opportunities for active living should be made available to all members of the Edina community by connecting centers of activity via active, multimodal transportation. Each resident of and visitor to Edina will have the ability to lead an active way of life. There are zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries. Perhaps the ultimate safety benchmark is zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries. Modeled from the Vision Zero Initiative (www.visionzeroinitiative.com), an aspirational yet primary goal of Living Streets is to achieve this high level of safety on the City’s roadways. Reduce untreated street water flows into local waterways and reduce storm water volume. Cost-effective stormwater best management practices (BMPs) are strategically selected to go above and beyond regulatory requirements to provide for flood protection and clean water services through the use of infrastructure that retains, settles, filters, infiltrates, diverts or reduces the volume of stormwater that flows to local surface waters. Retail streets stay or become popular regional destinations. Part of Edina’s Living Streets vision is that “streets support vibrant commerce.” While most of the city’s streets are residential, Edina’s business districts are a vital part of the community. The benefits of Living Streets extend to retail streets as well, making them more attractive to businesses and consumers alike. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy Page 736 of 1086 15 The City will draw on the following data to measure performance: • Number of crashes or transportation-related injuries reported to the Police Department. • Number and type of traffic safety complaints or requests. • Resident responses to transportation related questions in resident surveys. • Resident responses to post-project surveys. • The number of trips by walking, bicycling and transit (if applicable) as measured before and after the project. • Envision ratings from the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. • Additional performance measures may be identified as this Policy is implemented. Mini Fact Motorists must stop behind all crosswalks. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy Page 737 of 1086 APPENDIX G Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes Page 738 of 1086 Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: November 21, 2024 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Transportation Commission City Hall Community Room October 24, 2024 1. Call to Order Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. 2. Roll Call Answering roll call: Commissioners Bildsten, McCarthy, Rubenstein, Wright, Lassig, Lewis Absent: Commissioners Brown, Olson, Plumb-Smith, Rosen Staff present: Transportation Planner Andrew Scipioni, Senior Project Engineer Ben Jore, Assistant City Engineer Aaron Ditzler 3. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion was made by Commissioner Wright and seconded by Commissioner McCarthy to amend the agenda as follows:  Move Item 6.3 to 6.2  Move Item 6.2 to 6.3 All voted aye. Motion carried. Motion was made by Commissioner McCarthy and seconded by Commissioner Rubenstein to approve the amended agenda. All voted aye. Motion carried. 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes Motion was made by Commissioner Rubenstein and seconded by Commissioner McCarthy to approve the September 19, 2024 meeting minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried. 5. Community Comment None. 6. Reports/Recommendations 6.1. Presidents A/B Roadway Reconstruction Project Senior Project Engineer Jore and Assistant City Engineer Ditzler presented the draft engineering study for review and comment. Comments from Commissioners included:  Would the City consider a shared-use path on Monroe Ave instead of a sidewalk?  Consider asking about shared-use paths on future preconstruction surveys.  Consider using yard signs in the neighborhood to increase rate of response to the preconstruction survey.  Would the City consider turning one of these streets into a one-way?  Recommend updating typical section graphics to show user on a bicycle.  Does the City Forester offer residents street trees as part of the project? Page 739 of 1086 Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: November 21, 2024  Could the City provide a property tax break for residents with a multi-modal facility adjacent to their property?  Support sticking with the recommendations in the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan out of concern that City Council will downgrade proposed shared-use paths into sidewalks. Telling bicyclists to ride in the street isn’t safe.  Commission supports protected bikeways and protected facilities for pedestrians.  Consider communicating to residents that only 5’ of shared-use paths need to be maintained in winter.  Support the proposed shared-use path on Belmore to promote bike ridership and safety. Motion was made by Chair Lewis and seconded by Commissioner McCarthy to support the proposed shared-use path on Belmore Ln and the proposed sidewalk on Monroe Ave, and to recommend that staff consider separated pedestrian and bicycle facilities on Washington Ave noting that this might result in the loss of on-street parking. All voted aye. Motion carried. 6.2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan Review Draft Report The Commission reviewed and commented on the draft report. 6.3. Traffic Safety Infrastructure Research Draft Report The Commission reviewed and commented on the draft report. 6.4. Metro Transit Network Now Concept Plan Staff Liaison Scipioni presented the draft concept plan for review and comment. 6.5. Traffic Safety Report of September 24, 2024 The Commission reviewed and commented on the report. 6.6. 2024 Work Plan Updates 1. Traffic Safety Infrastructure Research and Recommendations – Commission reviewed and commented on the draft report. 2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan – Commission reviewed and commented on the draft report. 3. Parking – No update. 4. 20th Anniversary Proclamation – Completed. 6.7. 2025 Work Plan Update Staff Liaison Scipioni provided an update on the 2025 work plan development process. 7. Chair and Member Comments – Received. 8. Staff Comments – Received. 9. Adjournment Motion was made by Commissioner Rubenstein and seconded by Commissioner Bildsten to adjourn the October 24, 2024 regular meeting at 9:09 p.m. All voted aye. Motion carried. Page 740 of 1086 Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: November 21, 2024 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE J F M A M J J A S O N D # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 SEAT NAME 1 Wright, Grant 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90% 2 Rubenstein, Tricia 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 80% 3 Bildsten, Roger 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90% 4 Lewis, Andy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90% 5 Rosen, Adam 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 75% 6 Brown, Chris 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 70% 7 Olson, Bethany 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 80% 8 McCarthy, Bruce 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 80% 9 Plumb-Smith, Jill 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 80% 10 Lassig, Augie (s) 1 1 2 100% Page 741 of 1086 APPENDIX H Edina Transportation Commission Advisory Communication Page 742 of 1086 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Date: November 21, 2024 To: Mayor & City Council From: Transportation Commission Subject: Presidents A/B Multi-Modal Facilities Approved Work Plan Item: Yes No Council Charge: 1: Study & Report 2: Review & Comment 3: Review & Recommend 4: Review & Decide X Items not on the approved work plan: Council action is rarely taken mid-year for items not on the current approved work plan. Action is only taken if Council chooses to discuss the Advisory Communication at the Council meeting and provides specific direction through a Council vote. Commissions are encouraged to submit new initiative proposals through the annual work plan process. Action Requested: The Transportation Commission strongly advocates for separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities – separated and protected from motorized traffic for bicyclists, sidewalk for pedestrians - in street reconstruction projects, as outlined in the City’s Pedestrian and Bike Master Plan. Situation: Past decisions have often favored shared-use paths over fully separated infrastructure due to cost and snow removal concerns, which has compromised safety and weakened the City’s stated goals. Assessment: Shared-use paths are not the best solution for Edina. Residents and the Council have expressed safety and aesthetic concerns about these paths, often leading to compromises like sidewalk-only options or their complete removal. Such decisions weaken the master plan and our Strong Foundation and Livable City goals. While the Commission has approved shared-use paths in the past, it acknowledges they are rarely the best choice for balancing safety, aesthetics, and functionality. In some cases, the City has opted for shared- use paths instead of separate, buffered options for pedestrians and cyclists—solutions more consistent with the PBMP and MnDOT's Bicycle Facility Design Manual. To ensure fairness and equity for everyone, clear guidelines are needed for making and implementing these decisions. Recommendation: For the Presidents A & B project, we specifically recommend separated bike and pedestrian facilities on Washington Avenue, not a shared-use path. This street has high traffic and speeds, making separation essential for safety. Removing on-street parking for these two blocks would allow for this infrastructure, enhancing safety and aligning with city priorities to support non-motorized transit. Page 743 of 1086 APPENDIX I Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials Page 744 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov2025 Neighborhood Roadway ReconstructionInformational MeetingPage 745 of 1086 Agenda•Introductions•Why Reconstruct•Project Scopes•What You Can Expect•Funding Sources•Timeline•Communication•How to Prepare•Questions•SidewalksPage 746 of 1086 Engineering - Design & Construction DivisionBrandon FreemanEngineering TechnicianChris MooreGraduate EngineerAaron DitzlerAssistant City EngineerChad MillnerDirector of EngineeringJon MooreSr. Engineering TechnicianTom HaatajaSr. Engineering TechnicianBen JoreSr. Project EngineerLiz MooreEngineering CoordinatorPage 747 of 1086 2025 Project Area•Presidents A/B•301 PropertiesPage 748 of 1086 Why My Street?•Streets grouped into neighborhoods•Maximizes economics of scale•Extends pavement life•Proactive Pavement Management Program•Prioritized based on;•Pavement condition•Underground utility issuesPage 749 of 1086 Why Reconstruct?•Roadway originally constructed with gravel in the 1950’s, followed by utilities and paving in the 1960’s•Utility issues to address beneath roadway•More cost-effective than other maintenance strategies (mill & overlay, seal coat)Page 750 of 1086 Existing Conditions - Roadways•Pavement reaching end of useful life•Streets have curb and gutter•Some properties already have concrete driveway aprons, some do notPage 751 of 1086 Existing Conditions – Gravel Alley•230 feet of gravel alley between Washington and Adams Avenues•Concerns about required maintenance (snow plowing operations)Page 752 of 1086 Existing Conditions –Asphalt Alley•580 feet of asphalt alley between Jefferson and Madison Avenues•Poor pavement condition, rutting•Portion has storm sewer and curb and gutter•Concerns about required maintenance (snow plowing operations)Page 753 of 1086 Existing Conditions - Utilities•Watermain- Loss in pipe wall thickness- Main and service breaks- Undersized mains•Sanitary Sewer- Cracks, breaks, sags, etc.- Inflow and infiltration•Storm Sewer- Structure deficiencies- Undersized pipes- Curb and gutter failingPage 754 of 1086 Existing Conditions – Right-of-Way•Retaining walls•Irrigation systems and pet fences•Landscaping•Outwalks/stepsPage 755 of 1086 What / Where is the ROW?•Surface and space above and below public roadways used for travel purposes and utilities•Typically, 60’ width•(MSA Streets 66’)•Property corners located during surveyPage 756 of 1086 Proposed Improvements – Roadways and 2 Alleys•Replacement of curb & gutter (roadways) •Subgrade corrections as needed•New roadbed and asphalt pavement surfacePage 757 of 1086 Living Streets Plan•Approved by City Council in 2015•Balances needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders•Incorporates;•Minimum roadway design elements•See Exhibits•Pedestrian and Bicycle Master PlanPage 758 of 1086 Proposed Improvements - Driveways•Aprons will be replaced / installed to comply with City standards•Special driveway materials•Reimbursement PolicyPage 759 of 1086 Proposed Improvements - Utilities•Includes new watermain and service replacements•New fire hydrants and gate valves•May include localized sanitary sewer repairs and rehabilitation•Lining of sanitary sewer•Storm sewer upgradesPage 760 of 1086 Proposed Improvements – Sump Drain•Installed when feasible and warranted•Homeowners encouraged to connect to City Sump Drain•Notification will be given when connecting is available•Sump connection permit available thru City websitePage 761 of 1086 Utility OwnershipCity Owned UtilitiesA –Water ServiceE –Water Service ShutoffResident Owned UtilitiesB –Water ServiceC & D – Sanitary ServicePage 762 of 1086 Utility Ownership•Recommend inspecting private services prior to construction•Repairs/upgrades can be coordinated with street work•Associated costs can be added to special assessmentResident Owned UtilitiesB –Water ServiceC & D – Sanitary ServiceCity Owned UtilitiesA –Water ServiceE –Water Service ShutoffPage 763 of 1086 Private Utilities•Gas, Electric, Telephone, Cable may upgrade or repair their utilities before construction begins•Fiber optic internet installation during construction•Potential City-required relocations•Goal: streamline projects and minimize neighborhood disturbance•Streetlight upgrades typically not included with projectPage 764 of 1086 What You Can Expect•Dust, mud, noise, and vibrations•Occasional delays due to inclement weather•Localized flooding during rainfall•Residents will be asked to limit water use occasionally•Homes may be connected to temporary watermainPage 765 of 1086 What You Can Expect•Construction materials stored temporarily in ROW•5-10 feet of disturbance behind back of curb•Construction equipment stored on streets•Tree removals as necessary (property owners notified)Page 766 of 1086 What You Can Expect•Driveways and roads will be periodically inaccessible•Driveways will be inaccessible for 7 days to allow driveways to curePage 767 of 1086 What You Can Expect•Items within the City’s right-of-way may be damaged•You can remove plants and other landscape features before the project•Irrigation and pet fences will repaired•Disturbed areas will be restored with new sodPage 768 of 1086 What You Can Expect•We will;•Provide opportunities for input•Keep you informed•Do our best to minimize inconveniences•Our contractor will accommodate residents with special access needsPage 769 of 1086 City Utility Funds•Collection of utility service charges paid to the City•Covers 100% of:•Storm sewer (curb and gutter, driveway aprons, sump drain pipe) •Sanitary sewer•WatermainPage 770 of 1086 Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund•Promotes non-motorized transportation throughout the City•Covers 100% of:•Sidewalks /shared-use paths•Bike lanes•Associated signage and pavement markings•Revenue from Xcel and CenterPoint Energy franchise feesPage 771 of 1086 Do Taxes Cover Street Projects?•~23% of property taxes go to the City for expenses including Police, Fire, Parks, and Public Works•~3.5% go to Public Works •Snowplowing•Pothole repairs•Other street maintenance (sealcoating, overlays, patch repairs)•In 2022 taxes began paying for a portion of street reconstructionFigures per proposed 2024 Edina Tax Levy (not final)Page 772 of 1086 Special Assessments•Assigned to benefitting properties of public improvements•Covers portion of roadway costs•Roadway and driveway removals•Asphalt pavement•Restoration•Indirect Costs – engineering, finance, soil investigations, mailingsPage 773 of 1086 Residential Equivalent Units•Assessments distributed based on REUs•Factor used to compare properties to a single-family residence•Additional factors for commercial, industrial, and public-use propertiesREU FactorLand Use ClassScenario1.0Single-Family ResidentialA0.8Multi-Family Residential – DuplexBPage 774 of 1086 Project Details – Presidents A and B•301 properties (291.60 REUs) •2.75 miles of road •Full removal and replacement of curb & gutter•Full watermain, water services replacement•Sanitary Lining and local replacement•Storm sewer improvements•24’ street width:•Incl. 5’ concrete walk on Monroe Ave•Incl. 8’ shared use path on Washington and Belmore Aves•3rdSt S•27’ street width remaining streetsPage 775 of 1086 Project Details – Presidents A and B Alleys•230 feet of gravel alley between Washington and Adams Avenues•New 10’ wide asphalt pavement on existing gravel alley•580 feet of asphalt alley between Jefferson and Madison Avenues•Reconstruct alley with new asphalt pavementPage 776 of 1086 Revised Roadway Cost Assessment - Local Sample Assessment During Transition$20,000$15,000$10,000% of Local Roadway Costs Assessed Construction Year$20,000$15,000$10,000100%2020$15,780-$12,624$11,835-$9,468$7,890-$6,31278.90%-63.12%2021-2024$11,572$8,679$5,78657.86%2025$10,520-$1,052$7,890-$789$5,260-$52652.60%-5.26%2026-2035$0$0$00%2036Page 777 of 1086 Preliminary Assessments – Presidents A/B Roadway*Residential equivalent unit (1 single-family home = 1 REU)Square Yards of Paving per REUSquareYards of Paving#of REUsEstimated Assessment Range per REU*% of Roadway Costs Assessed Neighborhood121.735,250291.60$7,500 - $11,50057.86%Presidents (2025)175.230,568174.49$11,900 - $17,10063.12%Concord B/C (2024)144.819,273133.11$8,500 - $14,00068.38%Morningside C(2023)Page 778 of 1086 Preliminary Assessments – Presidents A/B Gravel Alley*Residential equivalent unit (1 single-family home = 1 REU)Square Yards of Paving per REUSquareYards of Paving#of REUsEstimated Assessment Range per REU*% of Alley Costs Assessed Neighborhood28.92609.0$1,000 - $1,60057.86%Presidents (2025)40.665016.0$1,871100%Presidents (2006)28.92609.0$1,700 - $2,800100%Presidents (2025)Page 779 of 1086 Typical Project TimelineMilestoneDateEngineering studies/estimates providedJuly –September2024Public hearingsDecember 2024Plan preparation and biddingJanuary – March 2025Construction beginsApril – May 2025Construction concludesOctober – November 2025Warranty workSpring 2026Final assessment hearingFall 2026Page 780 of 1086 Assessment TimingMilestoneDateInitial Public HearingsDecember 2024Project ConstructedSummer 2025Final Assessment HearingOctober 2026Assessment Filed with CountyNovember 2026Assessment on Tax StatementJanuary 2027Page 781 of 1086 Payment Options•Pay entire amount upon receiving bill to avoid interest charges•Pay min. 25% ; balance rolls to property taxes over 15 years •Roll entire amount to property taxes over 15 years•2024 interest rate was 4.69%•Finance charges are 1% over City’s borrowing interest rate•Defer payment if 65 years of age or older and meet specific income requirements•Assessing Department – 952-826-0365Page 782 of 1086 Communication•Regular Mail•All meetings, public hearings, and questionnaires•Final assessment notices (one year after construction)•Door hangers and flyers •Time-sensitive information (water shut-offs, concrete, temporary inaccessibility)•Better Together Edina – City Website Project PagePage 783 of 1086 Better Together Edina•Best way to stay informed•www.bettertogetheredina.org•Free, access to periodic updates on project progress and schedulesPage 784 of 1086 Providing Input•Questionnaires mailed to your home, weigh in on;•Traffic/pedestrian issues•Street drainage issues•Streetlight upgrades•Public hearing in December 2024•Opportunity for residents to voice comments and concernsPage 785 of 1086 Questionnaire ResultsResponses Received to DateNeighborhood15% (46 / 301)Presidents A/BPage 786 of 1086 How To Prepare•Complete project questionnaire•Begin financial planning•Coordinate home and yard improvement projects around street reconstruction schedule•Review Better Together Edina updates•Ask questions, stay informedPage 787 of 1086 Contact UsEngineering Department7450 Metro BoulevardHours: 7:00 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.952-826-0371Liz MooreEngineering Coordinator952-826-0449LMoore@edinamn.govAaron DitzlerAssistant City Engineer952-826-0443ADitzler@edinamn.govPage 788 of 1086 Questions?•Ask questions on Better Together Edina Q&A page•https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/presidents-ab•Call or emailPage 789 of 1086 Thank you for your time!Page 790 of 1086 Proposed Multi-Modal Facilities•Guided by Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan, Living Streets Plan, Climate Action Plan•Improve access and mobility•Provide connections to parks, school, transit servicePage 791 of 1086 Washington Ave•Reduce street width by 6’•One-sided parking to remain•New 8’ shared-use path (east side)•Maloney Ave to 3rdSt•Shared-use path to be maintained by adjacent property ownersExistingProposedPage 792 of 1086 Monroe Ave•Reduce street width by 6’•One-sided parking (east side) •New 5’ sidewalk (east side)•Maloney Ave to 2ndSt•Sidewalk to be maintained by adjacent property ownersExistingProposedPage 793 of 1086 Belmore Ln•Reduce street width by 6’•One-side parking (north side)•New 8’ shared-use path (north side)•Washington Ave to Dearborn Ct•Shared-use path to be maintained by City adjacent to Alden park•Maintained by adjacent property owners otherwiseExistingProposedPage 794 of 1086 3rdSt•Reduce street width by 6’•One-side parking (south side)•Existing 10’ shared-use path to remainExistingProposedPage 795 of 1086 Other Local Streets•Reduce street widths by 3’•Two-sided parking to remain•No multi-modal facilitiesExistingProposedPage 796 of 1086 2025 NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION INFORMATIONAL MEETING EDINA PUBLIC WORKS September 24, 2024 NAME ADDRESS 1 >t,..-1 app iL / 5.6%4 if_ P31-,9iZ_.- . q a Ti lee kuE. 5 . 2 Out. c..K. * -St" ct, itY1 0 L___%.,2 11.1-0 A cteg-rvi s Av e_ S 3 1:01 h -e, i-- k -i-t-ti aI A d iA.,..f. 4ve- 4 lilt tAl + Jvg7 A-149606x1 (.04,N, 13livolie- Ztl 5 I?/ Cg /Tr() iftiurrtr Ya7 H/3-friWat-' A 6 -..Tikk €10,,,,,, • 4/0"/ 3-144:50r) ifilA-t . 7 3Wboriato- . i lef 5+ 30 S Movv14- PriAl. a) • 71:Sak 61 8 6,11 /404.140 307 4-eferso et Air& s • 9 Oakii it trktun LEH 34.c.,Icsor i1/4-1112_3 10 n17.--,44 r-i- u 51-- k '114 410 4)Aor A v_ S . 11 Of t / / -7',,?---c- i- 3 pe /1-14 4"0.-A-tt-d- d-1.10--- ' 12 e itO ) 04A-disc, 41/e S 13 .)04 d Ien-lie e . i i..)/ c4.... ct t be..41---s gis/Petrif-s044.e S. 1 --i 2-t MM OZ_ 14\(R_,S 14 15 C___O*4-1 i 0\4•41504‘ L-to rickuczcse\ Piv.R.... . 16 17 Marla Lurie j 406 Jackson Ave. S. Hopkin 18 II ital i I iii i aa 41, 19 314Ce-fre-1/4/ 30le 16rCerSoil A.2. S , 20 1>rbJ (Aigdye..,) P_011-1- -3 77.._ too eJgc.DE A-./ 21 30\ft., Iv 5 v-vr:v.._5c,AR -1476, M c.,^ .r..,.e .. c C. 22 4E09 MAEWM, A liL, c , r i /gA/1?(A.A-Cii/ 23) frei.-<,-, 9/ 7 AliAzi 45 < 24 .. (N$ col (.16.161eq ?06 maihm, 4.1(4. S 3o(.0 Va-ex• t.ike-44_ 4-vt_5• 26 25 aeryv4larl-Lojewv.e.A.S) , , 4 30(0 Van, 6v-rem Avt . 27 Ger eatiney 1-y ____. AI /1/0 `-(0 L/cW 3-fe,)-ko .f. 28 ,1--1/kii2 Ojr-y HI t kkui Qwv.t., .4, J 29 ,Ionlep..5 6044,91,A. 111 7 ci4e450m Aoe S 30 31 Page 797 of 1086 APPENDIX J Resident Questionnaires Page 798 of 1086 Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey SURVEY RESPONSE REPORT 01 July 2024 - 26 November 2024 PROJECT NAME: Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Page 799 of 1086 SURVEY QUESTIONS Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 1 of 50 Page 800 of 1086 Q1 Does your property have drainage issues the City should know about?Examples: History of flooding/standing water, grading, b... 11 (16.2%) 11 (16.2%) 57 (83.8%) 57 (83.8%) Yes No Question options Mandatory Question (68 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 2 of 50 Page 801 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:08 PM We have a very active sump pump in the spring or after heavy rains. There are two storm sewer drains at the property line on my neighbor's side. One in front of the garage and one in the back yard. The drains are very active draining both properties during a fast thaw or heavy rain. Screen Name Redacted 7/21/2024 10:22 AM Our alley drains excessively directly into our garage. Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 10:17 AM We have a drain running from the driveway under the garage into the back yard. If it becomes clogged water backs up in the garage. Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 05:59 PM Water in basement that drips in from basement ceiling into old well room. weird grading in back and along north side of house, and around garage Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 04:30 PM our driveway is at the bottom of a hill. When snow melts or rains hard the water runs right over the lip on the end of the driveway. The water runs down our driveway and pools or goes into the garage. Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 06:03 PM City water drains were added to my property before I purchased it and sub pump is in constant use in spring Screen Name Redacted 10/19/2024 11:38 AM We live on the corner of Monroe and Maloney. Our main line has backed up a couple times this year (this was even after we had tree roots cleared out). Each time a sewer company came out they said it was simply a soft blockage. We did get water damage in our basement because of this, and had a descaling of our sewer line in September. We are considering potentially doing a re-lining of our sewer next summer, during the road construction. Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 05:50 AM I have a large driveway that slopes away from road towards garage. Rainwater runs around garage on South side, into backyard, and pools near foundation. A sump pump sends this water further into backyard away from foundation. Screen Name Redacted from my location all water drains to the north down the hill Q2 Please comment on the location and types of problems you have. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 3 of 50 Page 802 of 1086 10/24/2024 01:58 PM Screen Name Redacted 11/06/2024 01:16 PM between properties in the backyards between Jefferson and Adam's, water floods a little in the spring because the ground is low there. Hasn't been an issue damaging any structures, but doesn't have a drain back there. Optional question (10 response(s), 58 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 4 of 50 Page 803 of 1086 Q3 How concerned are you with the speed of traffic in your neighborhood or on your street? 42 (61.8%) 42 (61.8%) 14 (20.6%) 14 (20.6%) 12 (17.6%) 12 (17.6%) Not Concerned Concerned Very Concerned Question options Optional question (68 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 5 of 50 Page 804 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 11:11 AM Harrison Ave south. it is being used as a through street because of excelsior Ave access. cars speed and run stop sighs Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:10 PM Harrison Ave S has a downslope heading north to south that results in cars regularly exceeding speed limint;. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:37 PM Corner of Madison to cemetery- hard to see traffic Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 04:45 PM Belmore and Melony Ave both have a lot of cars that travel way too fast. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 07:21 PM 416 Van Buren Ave South. Concerned because people speed thru our area constantly. Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:34 AM 3rd avenue and Washington Ave Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 04:51 PM Belmore and Maloney only Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:01 PM 300 block of Harrison Ave S. cars are going very fast down the street at all hours of the day. Cars particularly are flying down or up the hill which is dangerous to pedestrians. Buses are also speeding down the neighborhood. Lack of street lights is dangerous to pedestrians. Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 08:02 AM Harrison is used as a route through the neighborhood, especially when there is construction on Excelsior or Blake. I've seen cars going more than 35 down this road, a road with many walkers, bikers and kids. Screen Name Redacted 7/21/2024 10:22 AM The alley between Madison and Jefferson Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 10:17 AM People speed and fail to stop at the stop signs at Harrison &amp; Belmore generally heading East/West. Q4 If concerned or very concerned, please enter the location(s) of concern and why you feel that way. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 6 of 50 Page 805 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 11:23 AM The hill that leads down Belmore Lane to Blake Ave (or reverse - coming up the hill to the top of Belmore) causes cars to increase their speed and sometimes not having full visibility Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:00 PM On Belmore Lane between Blake and Harrison cars drove too fast and there are no stop signs in that section. Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:44 PM From Harrison to Blake Road on Belmore Lane, there are no stop signs. Cars are using Belmore Lane to avoid Excelsior Blvd and speeding to get to/from Hwy 169. We currently have no sidewalks on Belmore Lane. Families with children, walking with strollers/bikes, and dogs routinely go to Alden Park on Belmore Lane. We would strongly recommend some stop signs, or other traffic slowing options, and sidewalks on Belmore Lane. Thanks. Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 04:57 AM Traffic volume on Monroe due to the school near by the speed in which people drive they are not concerned because it's not their neighborhood! Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 07:20 PM Maloney and Tyler down to 169 Screen Name Redacted 7/27/2024 06:47 AM As it relates to putting in a sidewalk, I’d be very disappointed if that were to happen. I feel like we’d lose the aesthetic of the neighborhood. Many homeowners on Monroe maintain their lawns and driveways very well. People take pride in the way their lawns look. If we put sidewalks in, residents would likely lose some of their yard, losing some of the charm of the area. I’ve spoken with a few neighbors about this in my area and they’ve also expressed concern with the idea of sidewalks. Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM Jackson Avenue is 1 block long so it is a very pedestrian friendly street. There are however occasional instances of people accelerating quickly down the street which is the only point of concern. Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 04:30 PM Belmore has seen an increase in traffic over the last two or so years. The cars speed on our road and ignore stop signs. I see cars run the stop sign on my corner all day. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 7 of 50 Page 806 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 10:55 AM Belmore Avenue - this is a connector street and many cars drive well over 30 mph down it to get through the neighborhood - myself and many neighbors walk down Belmore (with no sidewalk) with our pets and/or children. There are hills that make it difficult to see pedestrians as a driver. A sidewalk and speed bumps would be useful on this road. Maloney - this is another connector street (thankfully it has a sidewalk) where cars drive well over 30 mph to get through the neighborhood. Speed bumps on this road would be useful as well. Van Buren Ave S - This street has one of the steepest hills in the neighborhood. Drivers accelerate coming up the hill and also approach the downhill too fast. The slope of the hill makes it difficult to see pedestrians who have to walk on the street because there is no sidewalk. Washington Ave S - this is another connector street, very often used by freight trucks traveling between the UNFI building (technically in Hopkins) and Highway 169. The speed limit is 25, but often cars and semis will drive around 40 mph. There is no sidewalk or bike lane here, making it dangerous for the people living on Washington to walk around, or for neighborhood residents to reach Van Valkenburg Park. That route is also often used by bikers who have no bike lane and have to contend with fast-driving cars and trucks. Blake Road - since construction was completed on Blake Road this year, many vehicles speed down the roadway as a connector between Hopkins and Edina. There is a new sidewalk and bike route along Blake Rd now, but many residents, including myself, cross Blake in both directions to reach various destinations. The speed of vehicles makes that dangerous. A couple simple solutions would be adding raised crosswalks that act as speed deterrents and also increase visual indications of pedestrians crossing. Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM Blake Road, Belmore Ave, Maloney Ave, Washington Ave Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM Cars and trucks zoom quite fast on all three streets near my house. Last year, a car rear-ended my parked truck in front of my house (Adams Ave). But Belmore is way worse. Cars speeding down the hill from the park are a real problem. Reducing the size of the road and adding more stop signs would all be very helpful. I'm also very excited about a shared-use path down Belmore. Washington is the most dangerous of the three, not just because of the speed but because of the size of the trucks. And there is no place for kids or families to walk or bike. Van Valkenburg is a destination where many families walk or bike (there's the dog park and baseball, flag football, etc). Adding a shared-use bike path along Washington to Van Valkenburg will be one of the most important upgrades of this entire project. As an aside, the LRT will come online next year, and foot and bike traffic will increase from Edina up Washington Ave to the LRT Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 8 of 50 Page 807 of 1086 stop in Downtown Hopkins. (This should be considered as well.) Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 06:03 PM People fly from Maloney to Monroe. May need to add a stop sign Screen Name Redacted 10/19/2024 11:38 AM Being on the corner of Monroe and Maloney, sometimes cars to rev up and seem to be going very fast on Maloney. Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 05:50 AM Not at all. The streets are wide and plenty of people walk, run, and bike on the streets without issue. The traffic is always light and slow enough for no concerns. Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:58 PM Belmore Ave from Blake St to Washington Ave. Cars do drive by Alden Park at high speeds especially between Harrison &amp; Monroe. Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:25 AM Washington Ave. The semi-trucks going to Unfi are a hazard if you are trying to pull foot traffic and cyclists to the area. Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:46 AM The Semi trucks coming down Washington are driving above exceeded limits. Proposing to narrow the streets here for a shared path is a concern. Optional question (28 response(s), 40 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 9 of 50 Page 808 of 1086 Q5 How concerned are you with the volume of traffic or number of vehicles in your neighborhood or on your street? 46 (67.6%) 46 (67.6%) 18 (26.5%) 18 (26.5%) 4 (5.9%) 4 (5.9%) Not Concerned Concerned Very Concerned Question options Optional question (68 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 10 of 50 Page 809 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 11:11 AM Harrison Ave south. it is being used as a through street because of excelsior Ave access. cars speed and run stop sighs Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:08 PM Belmore Lane and the north end of Jackson Ave can become congested with cars parking on both sides of the street when there is a soccer match in Alden Park. It often reduces the traffic to one lane. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:10 PM Feels like above average levels of traffic come thru this area on Harrison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 04:45 PM Belmore and Melony Ave both seem to have a lot of unnecessary traffic. They are using these roads as a shortcut to Blake Road. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 07:21 PM 416 Van Buren. Lots of speeding cars up and down our street. Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:34 AM 3rd avenue gets a lot of traffic- would not want it to increase Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 10:37 AM Some homeowners have more vehicles than people in the house. Too many cars on the street even in winter. Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 08:02 AM Again, volume increases during construction projects in the area. It would help to have a temporary stop sign at 2nd St &amp; Harrison in order to slow traffic. This can be a dangerous intersection as the walking/biking trail behind Blake School comes out here. Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 09:05 AM Only during construction on Excelsior was it a concern Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:44 PM See #4. Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 04:57 AM See above answer Q6 If concerned or very concerned, please enter the location(s) of concern and why you feel that way. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 11 of 50 Page 810 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 07:20 PM Lots of traffic coming through to Interlachen and other destinations off of highway. Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM Alden Park is used for soccer and the people attending these games largely ignore the no parking signs and create pinch points at the park which become dangerous when people are crossing from the park to the neighborhood. Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 04:30 PM As mentioned above the traffic on our road Belmore has really increased. they speed and we have where to get off the road when walking. Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 10:55 AM The volume of cars on Washington Ave S are the most concerning, because many of them are freight trucks. Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM Washington Ave has constant freight traffic with very little clearance for walkers or bikers. Belmore and Maloney also have dangerously blind intersections with no physical speed deterents i.e. raised sidewalks, speed bumps, roundabouts. Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM See above -- Belmore is very busy and cars zoom. Washington is even busier (and frankly, pretty ridiculous. We let large semi-trucks drive through our neighborhood at zero cost to Unfi). I watched the video of the hearing and I understand the current plan is to increase the load capacity of Washington Ave. I think this is the wrong approach. It should not be the job/burden of the residents of Presidents Neighborhood to accommodate semi-traffic on our roads. If Unfi wants semi-trucks to access their location, they can petition Hopkins to create a Truck Route down Excelsior or another route. Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 06:03 PM Traffic moves quickly on Monroe it is the next full street between Maloney and excelsior. Might be good to bulb curbs on Maloney, bellmore, and third street to slow or deter traffic since there is a daycare/school and park located on Monroe Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:58 PM Harrison Ave to Monroe. Parking and traffic is a concern when there are soccer games at Alden Park. There are a lot children and pet walkers that walk out onto Belmore &amp; Jackson Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 12 of 50 Page 811 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:46 AM I am only concerned with the Semi trucks driving above designated speed limits. Optional question (20 response(s), 48 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 13 of 50 Page 812 of 1086 Q7 How concerned are you with motorist behavior in your neighborhood? (Excludes speed and traffic volumes. Examples of poor motorist behavior include rolling through stop signs, failing to yield and driving aggressively) 14 (20.9%) 14 (20.9%) 48 (71.6%) 48 (71.6%) 5 (7.5%) 5 (7.5%) Concerned Not Concerned Very Concerned Question options Optional question (67 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 14 of 50 Page 813 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 11:11 AM Harrison Ave south. it is being used as a through street because of excelsior Ave access. cars speed and run stop sighs Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 01:41 PM I walk my dog a couple times every day and I've witnessed people rolling through the stop signs by my house. I feel as though I have to be on high alert when nearing the intersection. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:08 PM Motorists coming from the east down Belmore Lane tend to roll through the stop sign at Monroe Ave. This is likely due to the stop being at the bottom of the hill and a tree branch partially blocking the sign. Parents dropping their kids off at the Harley Hopkins Center often roll through the stop sign at 3rd St S/2nd St S and Monroe Ave. The offset makes crossing more dangerous. A sidewalk and crosswalk won't likely help. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:10 PM See previous related answer Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 04:51 PM Belmore along the park pedestrians walk in the street and cars block the street, the cars go so fast. Cars don’t stop at the Monroe/Belmore stop sign. Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 10:17 AM Rolling through stop signs at Belmore/Harrison. Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 11:23 AM corner of Belmore and Harrison - always people running that stop sign / rolling through after speeding up Belmore Lane hill Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:00 PM See above Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:44 PM Rolling thru the stop signs on Belmore/Harrison. Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 04:57 AM 300 block of Monroe Ave So. Driving way too fast and that crazy stop sign intersection at 3rd St and Monroe Q8 If concerned or very concerned, please enter the location(s) of concern and why you feel that way. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 15 of 50 Page 814 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 07:20 PM One stop sign on maloney Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM We have noticed that there seem to be more aggressive driving overall, including ignoring stop signs, aggressive acceleration, etc. I doubt however if this is localized to just our neighborhood. Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 04:30 PM See cars running stop signs all day long. Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM Each intersection on Belmore and 2nd St. Each intersection on Blake. Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM Most of the behavior (I think) isn't mal-intent... It's mostly just people driving fast and not realizing it. The next question isn't fair because it affects my family the same if we are biking/walking/running/etc. There is no difference when my family goes on a bike ride or a walk. In fact, many times I'll walk, and the kids will bike. Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:58 PM Belmore Ave from Blake St to Washington Ave. Cars do drive by Alden Park at high speeds especially between Harrison &amp; Monroe. Optional question (16 response(s), 52 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 16 of 50 Page 815 of 1086 Q9 In general, these behaviors impact you most when you are: 11 (25.0%) 11 (25.0%) 3 (6.8%) 3 (6.8%) 30 (68.2%) 30 (68.2%) Driving Bicycling Walking, jogging, or running Question options Optional question (44 response(s), 24 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 17 of 50 Page 816 of 1086 Q10 Do you feel any intersection in your neighborhood is unsafe? 25 (37.9%) 25 (37.9%) 41 (62.1%) 41 (62.1%) Yes No Question options Optional question (66 response(s), 2 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 18 of 50 Page 817 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 11:11 AM Harrison and Belmore and Harrison and Maloney Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 01:41 PM Monroe Ave and Belmore Lane Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:08 PM 3rd St S/2nd St S and Monroe Ave The offset can make it a bit dangerous when cars are going east/west if people aren't paying attention, but i don't know if there is a simple solution. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:37 PM The corner turn around cemetery by 169 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 04:45 PM Washington and Belmore and Washington and Melony. Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:34 AM 3rd and Washington. It is the main business thoroughfare for UNFI and cars and gets quite congested. It makes it difficult hard for pedestrians to walk from Presidents to Hopkins under the Hwy 169 bridge. Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:57 AM The section of Belmore Ln between Monroe Ave S &amp; Van Buren Ave S becomes very congested, and difficult/dangerous to navigate when cars are parked on both sides of the street for park events like summer soccer games. The no-parking signs are commonly ignored near the park entrance on Belmore Ln creating a narrow passage that must be shared by pedestrians and vehicles. Additionally, cars parked in the no-parking zone create visual impairment of oncoming traffic for pedestrian traffic coming out of the park with kids commonly running out onto the street after soccer games. this area could use improvements or more consistent parking enforcement. Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 04:51 PM Belmore/Monroe stop sign, cars do not stop Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 08:02 AM Harrison and 2nd St where the walking path comes out. Maybe a sign at the end of the path to remind walkers and bikers (esp kids) to look for traffic, rather than adding a stop or yield sign. Q11 Which intersection do you feel is unsafe? Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 19 of 50 Page 818 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 10:46 AM Some residential bushes and shrubs are not maintained very well on the intersections between the 300 and 400 blocks along Belmore. This makes it challenging to see if cars are coming. Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 10:17 AM Belmore/Harrison Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:44 PM See #8. Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 04:57 AM Answer above Screen Name Redacted 7/28/2024 03:02 PM Monroe &amp; 2nd/3rd Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM Our neighborhood is largely pedestrian friendly, so no specific intersection consistently feels unsafe. The intersection at Alden park during a soccer game feels unsafe. Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 04:30 PM Belmore and Monroe Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 10:55 AM Van Buren Ave S and 2nd St. There is a 4-way stop, but the hill on Van Buren makes it difficult to see other cars, pedestrians, or bikers when traveling northward (coming down the hill). In winter, many cars are not able to fully stop when coming down the hill and roll through the stop sign. Washington Ave S and 3rd St. Myself and many residents cross under Highway 169 using this intersection in order to reach downtown Hopkins via 3rd St. There is no stop sign or yield sign for drivers on Washington Ave, and no crosswalk for pedestrians or bikers leaving or entering the neighborhood. I often have to dodge freight trucks coming from both UNFI warehouses (on Washington Ave and 3rd St) and cars driving down Washington Ave in order to cross. Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM Each intersection on Belmore and 2nd St. Each intersection on Blake. Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM See above, Washington Ave - Belmore/Maloney, etc (then around the corner to Van Velkenburg). The intersections by the Alden park are also unsafe. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 20 of 50 Page 819 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 02:08 PM Harrison Ave. S. and Maloney Ave. Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 06:03 PM Third street and Monroe Ave. Odd stop sign intersection Screen Name Redacted 10/20/2024 07:58 AM It is challenging to see west bound traffic when turning from Jackson at the Jackson/Maloney intersection. Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 01:36 PM Monroe/Maloney Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:58 PM Belmore &amp; Jackson Screen Name Redacted 10/30/2024 10:20 AM Van Buren Ave and 2nd St. If you're headed north in the wintertime, good luck stopping at the stop sign at the bottom of the hill, like a 60- degree incline. Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:25 AM Washington and Belmore Screen Name Redacted 11/06/2024 01:16 PM Not an intersection, but the lack of sidewalks on Washington Ave/Lincoln Drive, especially if walking to Van Valkenburg park. There is no sidewalk/bike path and it's a blind corner that cars fly around. I worry a car will hit a walker or cyclist. a walk/bike path on Washington Ave/Lincoln Drive and to the Van Valkenburg park would be solve this. Optional question (27 response(s), 41 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 21 of 50 Page 820 of 1086 Q12 Which, if any, of the following factors contribute to your feeling that the intersection is unsafe? (select all that apply) Lack of traffic control (traffic signal, stop sign, yield sign)Issues with sight lines or clear view Drivers failing to stop at stop sign Drivers failing to yield Drivers turning corner too fast Street(s) too wide Insufficient lighting Other (please specify) Question options 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 6 17 16 9 13 2 8 10 Optional question (33 response(s), 35 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 22 of 50 Page 821 of 1086 Q13 In general, the intersection feels most unsafe when you are: 16 (39.0%) 16 (39.0%) 3 (7.3%) 3 (7.3%) 22 (53.7%) 22 (53.7%) Driving Bicycling Walking, jogging, or running Question options Optional question (41 response(s), 27 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 23 of 50 Page 822 of 1086 Q14 How frequently do you walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood? 33 (48.5%) 33 (48.5%) 17 (25.0%) 17 (25.0%) 11 (16.2%) 11 (16.2%) 4 (5.9%) 4 (5.9%)3 (4.4%) 3 (4.4%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (68 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 24 of 50 Page 823 of 1086 Q15 If you walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood, what are your primary reasons for doing so? (select all that apply) Health/exercise Travel to/from destination (such as store, coffee shop)Commute to/from work Access transit Other (please specify) Question options 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 64 10 2 2 5 Optional question (64 response(s), 4 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 25 of 50 Page 824 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:10 PM Sidewalks Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 07:21 PM None. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 08:29 PM I mostly walk/bike on Maloney. I believe the sidewalk there is sufficient. No additional sidewalks are needed, especially not on the side streets (Van Buren and Jackson). Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:29 AM I think the neighborhood walkability is just fine and safe Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 04:51 PM Cars travel very fast on Belmore and Maloney, I won’t walk on them Screen Name Redacted 7/21/2024 10:22 AM More lighting for walking at night. Sidewalks on the busier streets, like Belmore, so we can access the park (Alden Park). Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:44 PM More sidewalks, which also builds community; neighbors stop to chat on sidewalks. Screen Name Redacted 7/27/2024 06:47 AM I do walk and jog around the neighborhood and I feel safe. I don’t think more sidewalks is worthwhile as there are ones on the main roads that people use. There’s also the short trail by the Blake School and the Alden park path. I’m able to follow a nice route with that. When I walk along Monroe to get to either route, I feel very safe. People drive slow and are respectful of those walking on the side of the street. Monroe is not busy enough where a sidewalk is necessary in my opinion. Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 02:47 PM None Screen Name Redacted Sidewalks, better lighting Q16 If you don't walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood as often as you would like, what reconstruction improvement might increase your walking, jogging, or running? Please list all that you can think of. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 26 of 50 Page 825 of 1086 7/29/2024 05:59 PM Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM None that come to mind. As mentioned prior, our neighborhood is very pedestrian friendly. Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 10:55 AM Sidewalks. It is much more pleasant for me to walk in the Hopkins part of the neighborhood because they have sidewalks on every street. Speed bumps on connector streets (Belmore, Maloney) to reduce vehicle speed. Raised crosswalks (doubling as speed bumps) and signage across Blake Rd. Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 11:43 AM None Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM Raised cross-walks/side-walks on more popular connector roads. Sidewalks and crosswalks on at least one side of every street. Narrowing of every street. Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM Shared Bike/Walking paths so I dont have to walk/bike on the street. Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 05:50 AM Adding a sidewalk or path on Lincoln from Maloney to Malibu/7th intersection and connecting past the Van Valkenburg park to the 169 bridge sidewalk. This section is extremely dangerous for walkers, runners, and bikers. There is no visibility on Lincoln when you're driving and turning the two successive corners. The only safe option is to cut through the cemetery private road, but this doesn't remove all of the danger. This makes Van Valkenburg park inaccessible to pedestrians by all President's neighborhood. There are no other unsafe intersections in President's neighborhood in my opinion as an avid runner, walker, and biker. I realize this proposed section is outside of the mapped project area, but adding sidewalks and bike paths to Washington Ave, and any other street as proposed, would be inconsequential in comparison to the advantage gained with adding a sidewalk South of Maloney. Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:42 PM No reconstruction improvements needed. Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:58 PM sidewalk on north side Belmore Ave or both sides Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 27 of 50 Page 826 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 10/30/2024 10:20 AM Path to the dog park or Van Valkenburg fields Screen Name Redacted 11/02/2024 11:26 AM Sidewalk along Lincoln Ave to the Van Valkenburg Park. That stretch is so dangerous for pedestrians, especially those with dogs. Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:46 AM None needed. There are sufficient walking paths in my neighborhood, 3rd Street has a shared path from Washington Rd to Blake Rd and Maloney Rd has a sidewalk from Washington Rd to Blake Rd. All within the span of 3 blocks, we do not need a shared path way down every street between Blake Rd and Washington Rd. Unnecessary, not enough foot/bike traffic. Screen Name Redacted 11/06/2024 01:16 PM a dual purpose sidewalk/bike path on Washington Ave/Lincoln Drive that stretches all the way to Van Valkenburg Park. Optional question (22 response(s), 46 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 28 of 50 Page 827 of 1086 Q17 How frequently do you ride a bicycle in your neighborhood? 3 (4.5%) 3 (4.5%) 6 (9.0%) 6 (9.0%) 18 (26.9%) 18 (26.9%) 20 (29.9%) 20 (29.9%) 20 (29.9%) 20 (29.9%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (67 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 29 of 50 Page 828 of 1086 Q18 If you ride a bicycle in your neighborhood, what are your primary reasons for doing so? (select all that apply) Health/exercise Travel to/from destination (such as store, coffee shop)Commute to/from work Access transit Other (please specify) Question options 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 42 17 5 2 2 Optional question (45 response(s), 23 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 30 of 50 Page 829 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 01:41 PM Bike paths that are safe and easy to access Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:08 PM None, i feel safe riding my bicycle through the neighborhood. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:10 PM Bike lanes Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 04:45 PM NONE Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 07:21 PM None Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:57 AM Bike path on Maloney Ave (option not available in list about bikeways - why?) Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 09:05 AM Bike lane Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 07:20 PM Bike path Screen Name Redacted 7/27/2024 06:47 AM When I bike in my neighborhood, I’m going to nearby bike path. It’s easy to use the current sidewalks to get there. With shorter blocks and lots of intersections, our neighborhood in general is not really an area I would care to bike around. More sidewalks would not make a difference in biking. Screen Name Redacted 7/28/2024 03:02 PM Segregated travel Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 02:47 PM None. No bike lanes needed! Q19 If you don't ride a bicycle in your neighborhood as often as you would like, what reconstruction improvement might increase your bicycle riding frequency? Please list all that you can think of. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 31 of 50 Page 830 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 05:59 PM Easy access to bike trail Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM None, that is on me and my family to make it more of a priority. Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 10:55 AM Protected bike lanes on connector streets (Belmore, Maloney, Washington). Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM Bike lanes/bike boulevards on every street. Narrowing of all areas for car traffic. Raised/curbed protection for all bike lanes. Quality concrete bike lanes, not asphalt. Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM Same as walking, see above. Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 05:50 AM See #16 Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:42 PM No reconstruction improvements needed. Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:58 PM sidewalk on north side Belmore Ave or both sides Screen Name Redacted 10/30/2024 10:20 AM a paved bike path to the main bike trails, maybe that goes under 169 and avoids having to go out to Excelsior. Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:46 AM None Screen Name Redacted 11/06/2024 01:16 PM a dual purpose sidewalk/bike path on Washington Ave/Lincoln Drive that stretches all the way to Van Valkenburg Park. Optional question (22 response(s), 46 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 32 of 50 Page 831 of 1086 Q20 How frequently do you or a member of your household park on the street? 5 (7.6%) 5 (7.6%) 5 (7.6%) 5 (7.6%) 7 (10.6%) 7 (10.6%) 28 (42.4%) 28 (42.4%) 21 (31.8%) 21 (31.8%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (66 response(s), 2 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 33 of 50 Page 832 of 1086 Q21 How frequently do visitors to your household park on the street? 6 (9.0%) 6 (9.0%) 8 (11.9%) 8 (11.9%) 30 (44.8%) 30 (44.8%) 20 (29.9%) 20 (29.9%) 3 (4.5%) 3 (4.5%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (67 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 34 of 50 Page 833 of 1086 Q22 How satisfied are you with the availability of on-street parking in your neighborhood? 36 (53.7%) 36 (53.7%) 24 (35.8%) 24 (35.8%) 5 (7.5%) 5 (7.5%)2 (3.0%) 2 (3.0%)0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Question options Optional question (67 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 35 of 50 Page 834 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:08 PM There are a number of houses on my street that use street parking daily. Reducing the street to parking on only one side may increase congestion and reduce the availability of parking. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 04:45 PM The winter parking restrictions need to be addressed. We should be allowed to park on the streets overnight as long as the are no snow events. Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:57 AM Parking for Alden Park is limited - could revise the paved surface near pumphouse on the north end of park and provide better parking signage. Seems like most of the soccer activities are Edina residents from other neighborhoods requiring car travel to park for activities vs walking. Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 02:15 PM People should not be able to park behind a driveway making it hard to back out Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 08:02 AM One of the best ordinances on the books in Edina is the no-parking overnight during the winter. The result is less street-parking, overall. It makes a big difference for walkers and bikers, as well as drivers navigating the streets. Living close to Hopkins border, it is stark difference driving down the same street when entering Hopkins as it's difficult for two cars to pass. They have a sidewalk for walking, and bikers often use it as the street is dangerous with all the parked cars. Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 10:46 AM Wishing the “winter parking restrictions” were lifted and only during inclement weather rather than Nov-April and after 10 pm. Tickets get issued to neighbors and with mild winters, seems a little pointless and inconvenient for those who don’t have as much room to park in driveways. Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 09:05 AM Parking on a single side of the street would be ideal for traffic flow, but not necessary Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 12:35 PM Winter parking is very difficult given ban on street parking. We have limited driveway/ garage space. I understand staying off the streets when there has been snow &amp; plows need to come through, but I would like to park in the street on other days. Q23 Any additional comments about parking? Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 36 of 50 Page 835 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 07:20 PM Unable to overnight park during winter. Screen Name Redacted 7/27/2024 06:47 AM This relates to sidewalks- I really don’t like the idea of sidewalks on my street, that would likely reduce the opportunity to park on the street as well as shorten my driveway. Having a single car driveway means when I have visitors or we need to move our cars around to get a car out of the garage, we use street parking. We are respectful of street parking and don’t leave our cars there, so I would like to keep both the length of my driveway and the option to park on the street as needed. I would be really disappointed if we had sidewalks or bike paths put in. Screen Name Redacted 7/28/2024 03:02 PM I thought on-street parking was prohibited Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 02:47 PM Bike lanes reduce parking availability and are not wanted or needed. Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM I like the ordinance requiring people to only park in the street for a limited time. This is a cornerstone of a pedestrian friendly neighborhood. i.e. with limited cars parked on the street, it is easier to see and avoid pedestrians. Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 10:55 AM Most of us have long driveways so there is ample space for parking in our driveways, let alone the streets. Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM Every house has a driveway. Street parking is rarely needed. The urban planning should be focused on designing the neighborhood to have driveway or parking lot parking and less street parking. Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM I think there is plenty of parking ... Most houses have garages and driveways. Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 06:03 PM If there is no snow on the ground street parking should be ok overnight. Bad city parking rule Screen Name Redacted 10/19/2024 11:02 AM The street by the Alden Park soccer field is filled with cars lined up along belmore. This often clogs the street. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 37 of 50 Page 836 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 10/19/2024 12:09 PM I live across from Alden Park. When there are youth soccer games held the parents Park on both sides of Belmore even though there are no parking signs posted on the north side of the street. If you narrow Belmore it will be difficult for traffic to get through. The no parking rules are not enforced. Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 05:50 AM Keeping the street (Van Buren) wide as is, helps. I don't believe that narrowing the streets will cause any noticeable impact, other than become a nuisance in the winter when snow accumulates and narrows the street further. Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:42 PM The current roads are already narrow. If cars/trucks/suvs park on both sides of the street, the current road effectively becomes a one-way. The images in the Sep 24 presentation do not accurate reflect the width of modern cars/trucks/suvs. A ford F150 with standard mirrors is ~96in wide mirror to mirror (8ft) and ~84" wide with mirrors folded in (7ft). That leaves zero clearance in the drive and parking lanes, unlike the cars is shown in the presentation. Cars need clearance to pass parked cars safely. In winter the street will be even more narrow, since snow plows do not clear snow all the way to the curb. We will lose another foot of available road width on both sides of the street. Screen Name Redacted 10/30/2024 10:20 AM I've got a few neighbors that park too close to my driveway. One that parks in their yard sometimes. And another that parks their car facing the wrong direction on the street. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 01:05 PM 317 Adams Ave Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:08 PM Overall i feel that the neighborhood is safe and very walking friendly. Belmore Lane seems to have more traffic than the interior north/south streets. Optional question (22 response(s), 46 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Q24 Please tell us anything else you would like us to know about existing traffic or street conditions in your neighborhood. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 38 of 50 Page 837 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:10 PM Streets are pretty worn down, potholes are regular. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 04:45 PM We like our street just the way it is. We do not want sidewalks or bike lanes. The bike riders do not follow the laws or respect the lane they have to ride in. Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 07:21 PM How about a wild Turkey crossing sign since we have a huge Turkey population in our neighborhood Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:01 PM More street lights would make the neighborhood safer for walking in the fall and winter. Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 10:46 AM It is very dark at night in our neighborhood. Screen Name Redacted 7/21/2024 10:22 AM The alleys DESPERATELY need renovations and maintenance. Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 09:05 AM Street conditions seem to be poor every spring with potholes. Can’t wait to get new streets. Will really enjoy having driveway aprons too Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:44 PM Our alley, west of 6606 Belmore Lane, needs repair. Screen Name Redacted 7/26/2024 11:24 AM 6612 Belmore lane Screen Name Redacted 7/28/2024 03:02 PM 323 Monroe Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 02:47 PM No sidewalks, no bike lanes! Bikes do just fine without them. Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 05:59 PM 319 Madison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM Overall, the neighborhood has a very comfortable feel, as it is quiet, low traffic (for the most part) and very pedestrian friendly. Little improvement to what is already here is needed, save the game time Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 39 of 50 Page 838 of 1086 traffic at Alden Park. Not certain what the answer is there but it should be explored. Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM The hills on many streets, specifically Van Buren create dangerous conditions with blind intersections, high speeds, and rolling stops. Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM As mentioned above, increasing safety of pedestrian and bike traffic on Washington would be the most beneficial. Semi-trucks pose a real danger to the kids and families in this neighborhood. I'd be happy to answer more questions if you an interested. Just holler! Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 06:03 PM 419 Monroe Avenue South Screen Name Redacted 10/19/2024 11:38 AM The neighborhood overall, including the street traffic, is pretty calm and quiet. The only times vehicles can be loud or seem to be speeding is down Maloney. Screen Name Redacted 10/30/2024 10:20 AM streets are getting kind of beat up, lot more potholes recently. Screen Name Redacted 11/02/2024 11:26 AM 416 Adams Ave Screen Name Redacted 11/06/2024 01:16 PM I would love a dual purpose sidewalk/bike path on Washington Ave/Lincoln Drive that stretches all the way to Van Valkenburg Park. There bend around Lincoln Drive feels very unsafe for walkers/bikers. Optional question (22 response(s), 46 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 40 of 50 Page 839 of 1086 Q25 Do you favor improving streetlights in your neighborhood? (residential streetlights are 100% funded by special assessment) 25 (36.8%) 25 (36.8%) 39 (57.4%) 39 (57.4%) 4 (5.9%) 4 (5.9%) Yes No Other (please specify) Question options Optional question (68 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 41 of 50 Page 840 of 1086 Q26 Which of the following streets are you supportive of sidewalks on? Please note before answering:The street width will be 24 feet wide from the face of curb to the face of curb. (Existing width ranges from 28-30’.)Parking will be available only on ... 2nd Street 3rd Street Adams Avenue Belmore Lane Harrison Avenue Jackson Avenue Jefferson Avenue Madison Avenue Monroe Avenue Tyler Avenue Van Buren Avenue Washington Avenue For All Against All No Opinion Tyler Court Question options 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 7 9 3 30 6 3 2 2 12 1 4 26 8 21 3 Mandatory Question (68 response(s)) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 42 of 50 Page 841 of 1086 Q27 Which of the following streets are your supportive of bikeways on? Please note before answering:The street width will likely be 24 feet wide from the face of curb to the face of curb. (Existing width ranges from 28-30’.)Staff’s recommendations for ... 2nd Street 3rd Street Belmore Lane Harrison Avenue Monroe Avenue Van Buren Avenue Washington Avenue For All Against All No Opinion Adams Avenue Jackson Avenue Jefferson Avenue Madison Avenue Tyler Avenue Tyler Court Question options 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 6 9 19 1 3 1 25 1 26 7 Mandatory Question (68 response(s)) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 43 of 50 Page 842 of 1086 Q28 Are you supportive of sidewalks on your side of the street? Please note before answering:Maintenance of sidewalks will be the responsibility of the adjacent property owners. Maintenance includes removal of snow and ice within 48 hours and repair of... 6 (8.8%) 6 (8.8%) 56 (82.4%) 56 (82.4%) 6 (8.8%) 6 (8.8%) Yes No No Opinion Question options Mandatory Question (68 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 44 of 50 Page 843 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 09:08 AM 402 Tyler Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 11:11 AM 408 harrison Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 01:05 PM 317 Adams Ave Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 01:41 PM 404 Harrison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 01:41 PM 409 Monroe Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 01:47 PM 407 Madison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:08 PM 417 Monroe Ave Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:10 PM 416 Harrison Ave S Edina 55343 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 02:37 PM 311 Madison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 04:45 PM 414 Van Buren Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 07:21 PM 416 Van Buren Ave S., Edina, Mn 55343 Screen Name Redacted 7/18/2024 08:29 PM 418 Jackson Ave Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:29 AM 403 Jackson Ave S/Edina, MN 55343 Q29 What is your address? Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 45 of 50 Page 844 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:34 AM 301 Jefferson Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:57 AM 409 Van Buren Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 07:00 AM 414 Monroe Ave So. Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 09:17 AM Van Buren Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 10:37 AM 314 Jefferson Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 02:15 PM 415 Monroe Avenue South Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 04:51 PM 302 van buren ave s Screen Name Redacted 7/19/2024 06:01 PM 315 Harrison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 08:02 AM 305 Harrison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/20/2024 10:46 AM 309 Jefferson. Four of of us (four homes) are on incline or hill and sidewalks would greatly affect our stairs, approaches and driveways. Jefferson is not on the proposed list anyway. Screen Name Redacted 7/21/2024 10:22 AM 306 Madison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 09:05 AM 308 Van Buren Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 10:17 AM 405 Harrison Ave S Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 46 of 50 Page 845 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 10:47 AM 318 Jefferson Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 11:23 AM 6600 Belmore Lane Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 12:35 PM 410 Monroe Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 01:27 PM 322 Moroe Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:00 PM 6600 Belmore Lane Screen Name Redacted 7/22/2024 06:44 PM 6606 Belmore Lane Screen Name Redacted 7/23/2024 07:26 PM 414 Jefferson Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 04:57 AM 305 Monroe Ave So Screen Name Redacted 7/24/2024 07:20 PM 421 Tyler Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/26/2024 11:24 AM 6612 Belmore lane Screen Name Redacted 7/27/2024 06:47 AM 311 Monroe Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/28/2024 10:49 AM 417 Jefferson Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/28/2024 03:02 PM 323 Monroe Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 02:47 PM 306 Monroe Av. S. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 47 of 50 Page 846 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 7/29/2024 05:59 PM 319 Madison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 09:14 AM 419 Jackson Avenue South Screen Name Redacted 7/30/2024 04:30 PM 401 Monroe Ave So. Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 10:55 AM 306 Van Buren Ave S Screen Name Redacted 8/01/2024 11:43 AM 410 Van Buren Ave S, Hopkins, MN 55343-8462 Screen Name Redacted 8/04/2024 10:24 AM 306 Van Buren Ave S Screen Name Redacted 10/14/2024 02:35 PM 320 Adams Ave Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 10:47 AM 410 Van Buren S Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 02:08 PM 419 Harrison Ave. S., Edina Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 02:29 PM 413 Washington Ave South Screen Name Redacted 10/18/2024 06:03 PM 419 Monroe Avenue Screen Name Redacted 10/19/2024 11:02 AM 400 Madison Ave S Screen Name Redacted 10/19/2024 11:38 AM 424 Monroe Ave S, Edina MN 55343 Screen Name Redacted 10/19/2024 12:09 PM 400 Jackson Avenue South Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 48 of 50 Page 847 of 1086 Screen Name Redacted 10/20/2024 07:58 AM 414 Jackson Ave S Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 05:50 AM 415 Van Buren Ave S Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 07:23 AM 423 Monroe Avenue Screen Name Redacted 10/21/2024 01:36 PM 422 Monroe Avenue South Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:42 PM 302 Monroe Ave South Screen Name Redacted 10/24/2024 01:58 PM 320 van buren ave south Screen Name Redacted 10/30/2024 10:20 AM 303 Van Buren Ave, Edina 55343 Screen Name Redacted 11/02/2024 11:26 AM 416 Adams Ave Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:25 AM 325 Washington Ave S Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:46 AM 325 Washington Ave S. Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 12:30 PM 405 Adams Ave Screen Name Redacted 11/04/2024 08:16 PM 406 Jefferson Ave S Screen Name Redacted 11/05/2024 04:40 PM 307 Jefferson Ave S Screen Name Redacted 406 Jefferson Ave S Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 49 of 50 Page 848 of 1086 11/06/2024 01:16 PM Mandatory Question (68 response(s)) Question type: Single Line Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 01 July 2024 to 26 November 2024 Page 50 of 50 Page 849 of 1086 APPENDIX K Correspondence from Residents Page 850 of 1086 2 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Wednesday, December 13, 2023 2:39 PM To:'Greg Shank' Subject:RE: Street Project Greg, Sure, what can I help with? Tyler Court is scheduled for reconstrucƟon in 2025. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov -----Original Message----- From: Greg Shank Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 10:03 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Street Project EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Aaron - reaching out regarding impending road reconstrucƟon in our neighborhood at 501 Tyler Ct. We connected some Ɵme ago regarding this issue and was wondering if you are sƟll with the city and if you are available to work with me regarding my quesƟons or if you could refer me to someone that might be more appropriate to speak with. Thanks, Greg Shank Page 851 of 1086 3 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Thursday, July 18, 2024 6:53 PM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner; eacosta@edinamn.gov Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by Keith Page. The question that was asked is: We have had issues with our main sewer line getting plug due to tree roots for over 28 years. We have even had the section closest to the house replaced because it collapsed. Is there any type of sleeve or other repair that can be done during construction that would help prevent this issue? If so, who would be responsible? Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 852 of 1086 5 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Monday, July 22, 2024 11:54 AM To:Liz Moore Subject:Presidents Survey - 318 Jefferson Ave Attachments:VoiceMessage.wav Liz, Can you mail a copy of the questionnaire to 318 Jefferson Ave? Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Ben Jore <BJore@EdinaMN.gov> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 9:28 AM To: Chris Moore <CMoore@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: FW: Message from HENNEN ROBERT H Hi Chris, Can you please send out the form to the individual per his request? Thanks Ben Ben Jore, Senior Project Engineer 952-903-5728 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 BJore@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Cisco Unity Connection Messaging System <unityconnection@vm-mail.org> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 3:10 PM To: Ben Jore <bjore@vm-mail.org> Subject: Message from HENNEN ROBERT H () Page 853 of 1086 6 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Monday, July 22, 2024 2:38 PM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner; eacosta@edinamn.gov Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by Liza. The question that was asked is: We have a very large pine tree in our front yard that is somewhat close to the street. Will you be removing trees due to the scope of the project? If you remove a tree, will you replace it? Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 854 of 1086 10 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2024 2:34 PM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner; eacosta@edinamn.gov Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by T. The question that was asked is: It looks like I missed the deadline for the survey and wanted to say I'm opposed to the addition of sidewalks and bike lanes. Will their be another survey in the future? Most roads in this neighborhood are already very narrow. For the roads that a bike lane is being considered, will this city be increasing the width of those road? Will cars still be able to park on those roads? or will there be significant reduction in available street parking as a result? Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 855 of 1086 13 Aaron Ditzler From:Kelly Sent:Wednesday, August 14, 2024 10:43 AM To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:List of Concrete Contractors EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Aaron, Thank you for taking the Ɵme this morning to talk with me about the presidents street reconstrucƟon project. You menƟoned you have a list of concrete contractors, can you please send me this list. Thank you, Kelly BoƩenberg Page 856 of 1086 25 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Wednesday, September 11, 2024 2:04 PM To:'Tim Jones' Subject:RE: Presidents Neighborhood Road Construction 2025 Attachments:Plumbers_Sump List Jan 2024.pdf Tim, Thank you for reaching out. We recommend geƫng at least two quotes from the aƩached contractor list, or other contractors if you wish. If you move forward with a contractor, let us know so we can coordinate with construcƟon in 2025. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov -----Original Message----- From: Tim Jones Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 12:43 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Presidents Neighborhood Road ConstrucƟon 2025 EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I am a resident of the Presidents neighborhood and would like to get a list of recommended contractors to replace water and sewer lines to the house during the road construcƟon next year. Is this a list that’s on your website, or can it be emailed to me? Thank you for your Ɵme. Tim Jones Van Buren Ave S. Sent from my iPad Page 857 of 1086 27 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Monday, September 16, 2024 12:06 PM To:'Debra Christgau' Cc:Katie; Subject:RE: Sewer line contractors for Presidents A&B Attachments:Plumbers_Sump List Jan 2024.pdf; Utility Upgrade Letter Example.pdf Debra, Sorry to hear about your sewer troubles. See the attached list of contractors. Additional notes:  We recommend getting at least two quotes.  If you move forward with a contract, please coordinate with us and roadway project.  As shown in the attached example letter, you may add the 2025 sewer improvements to your assessment and pay over 15 years, with interest. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Debra Christgau Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2024 8:45 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Katie Subject: Sewer line contractors for Presidents A&B EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. We have had significant clogging with our sewer line this year necessitating sewer line cleaning 3 times (Monroe Ave and Maloney). We have been advised from one sewer/plumbing company, after another clog a month after cleaning, and water damage, to decalcify the line, or at a greater cost, line or replace the sewer line. Who is the contractor the city is using that we might contact for estimates for further sewer work on our line, if we choose, while the city is doing this work? Page 858 of 1086 29 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Tuesday, September 17, 2024 12:25 PM To:'Chapin Stitt' Subject:RE: Presidents Neighborhood Question Chapin, At this point no sidewalks are proposed on Jackson Ave with the 2025 project. The street is proposed at 27’ wide with parking on both sides of the street. I would recommend staying involved because things can change before the public hearing in December. For example, we’ve had resident petitions to add sidewalks on previous projects. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Chapin Stitt Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 9:46 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Presidents Neighborhood Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, I received a notice in the mail informing me of upcoming roadway construction in the Presidents neighborhood, but after looking at the website it is unclear to me what the plans are for my specific street. Can you tell me if this includes plans to add a sidewalk on my street? I hope that's not the case as it is one of the reasons I chose this house. Any specific information you can give me for plans involving Jackson Ave S would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Chapin Stitt 409 Jackson Ave S Page 859 of 1086 32 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Thursday, September 19, 2024 8:43 AM To:'Debra Christgau' Subject:RE: Sewer line contractors for Presidents A&B Attachments:Postcard.JPG Debra, For reference, there is a meeting on 9/24 where we plan to go over the project improvements and discuss the assessments. See the attached postcard for reference. The estimated assessment range is $7,500 - $11,500 per single family property, unless you live on a corner lot with one side street outside the project area. If so, then divide that range by 2. We’ll narrow down the estimated assessment to one value in December. The final assessment amount will be determined in fall 2026. Sidewalks and utility improvements are not assessed. The only improvements included in the assessment value are roadway improvements. For example, if you have an $11,500 assessment at an estimated 4.5% interest, you will pay a level annual assessment of approximately $1,070 per year for 15 years, beginning in 2027 and concluding in 2041, through your property taxes. Add $10k of sewer repair and the amount changes to an estimated $2,002 per year. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Debra Christgau Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2024 8:14 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Re: Sewer line contractors for Presidents A&B EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you very much for the information regarding options for improvement of homeowner's sewer line. As we consider this option (current estimates from sewer companies are over $10,000), we would like additional information to estimate our total special assessment costs. The special assessment information on the city website is confusing as there appears to be a transition period. Our home currently has a tax assessment value of $400,000. Our property taxes are $4500. What would be approximately our additional special assessment for the next few years for the road/sewer reconstruction? Would a sidewalk be additional assessment cost for a homeowner? Would the special assessment remain the same for the next 10 years? Page 860 of 1086 37 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Wednesday, September 25, 2024 1:58 PM To:'Ruth Just' Subject:RE: Presidents A & B roadway, reconstruction Ruth, The short answer is yes, the same assessment amount. Single family homes are assessed 1 residenƟal equivalent unit (REU), regardless of lot size or front footage. The only excepƟon to this is homes with one side street outside the project limits, those homes are assessed 0.5 REU. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov -----Original Message----- From: Ruth Just Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:52 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Presidents A & B roadway, reconstrucƟon EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Property lots vary from 46 feet to 69 feet to 92 feet. Will all properƟes be assessed the same dollar amount? Thank you, Ruth Just Sent from my iPad Page 861 of 1086 38 Aaron Ditzler From:Ruth Just Sent:Wednesday, September 25, 2024 4:35 PM To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:Re: Presidents A & B roadway, reconstruction EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you for your quick response. I thought I heard that in the meeƟng last night, but I just wanted to clarify for sure. Sent from my iPad > On Sep 25, 2024, at 4:30 PM, Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: > > Ruth, > > The short answer is yes, the same assessment amount. > > Single family homes are assessed 1 residenƟal equivalent unit (REU), regardless of lot size or front footage. The only excepƟon to this is homes with one side street outside the project limits, those homes are assessed 0.5 REU. > > Thank you. > > Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer > 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 > 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 > ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ruth Just > Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:52 AM > To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> > Subject: Presidents A & B roadway, reconstrucƟon > > EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. > > > Property lots vary from 46 feet to 69 feet to 92 feet. Will all properƟes be assessed the same dollar amount? Thank you, Ruth Just > Sent from my iPad Page 862 of 1086 40 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Friday, September 27, 2024 9:06 AM To:'NADINE BROHOLM' Subject:RE: List of sewer & water line contractors Attachments:Plumbers_Sump List Jan 2024.pdf Nadine, Sure can. See aƩached list of contractors. We recommend geƫng at least two quotes. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov -----Original Message----- From: NADINE BROHOLM Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 9:59 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: List of sewer & water line contractors EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello! I live in the Presidents area and will be affected by next years road construcƟon project. Will you please send me the list of city approved contractors for replacing my sewer and water lines. Thank you, Nadine Broholm 413 Jackson Ave So Sent from my iPhone Page 863 of 1086 41 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2024 11:27 AM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner; eacosta@edinamn.gov Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by Old Fuss n Feathers. The question that was asked is: During the 9/24 meeting a city official informed a neighbor that our neighborhood is fortunate this project is happening sooner rather than later, such as in 5 years, because the costs to homeowners would be greater in 5 years. I wasn't able to attend this meeting, but the Special Assessment Policy on Edina's website shows percentage reductions in assessment costs to homeowners each year, from 63.12% in 2024 to 36.82% in 2029 for example. Can this possible miscommunication be clarified? Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 864 of 1086 42 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Sunday, October 6, 2024 1:18 AM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner; eacosta@edinamn.gov Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by Virginia Vonhof. The question that was asked is: How will each resident meet assessment costs? Additional taxes? A specific bill? With a twelve month payment option? Etc. Please advise. Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 865 of 1086 44 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 4:48 PM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner; eacosta@edinamn.gov Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by Casey Helbling. The question that was asked is: Has Washington Ave been designated a Truck Route, and if not, what can we do to discourage semi- trucks from not driving on it? If it has been designated a truck route, will the project team seek compensation from Unfi to offset the project development costs? I don't think we should let semis drive through our neighborhood... And I certainly don't think residents should pay to increase the durability of our roads to support the weight of those trucks. Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 866 of 1086 45 Aaron Ditzler From:Tim Jones Sent:Tuesday, October 15, 2024 1:17 PM To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:Re: Presidents Neighborhood Road Construction 2025 EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I was curious how far out you need to know about a contractor. Is it something that has to be done this year, or is the beginning of 2025 enough Ɵme? Thanks, Tim Jones Sent from my iPad > On Sep 11, 2024, at 5:01 PM, Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: > > Tim, > > Thank you for reaching out. We recommend geƫng at least two quotes from the aƩached contractor list, or other contractors if you wish. If you move forward with a contractor, let us know so we can coordinate with construcƟon in 2025. > > > Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer > 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 > 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 > ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Jones > Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 12:43 PM > To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> > Subject: Presidents Neighborhood Road ConstrucƟon 2025 > > EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. > > > I am a resident of the Presidents neighborhood and would like to get a list of recommended contractors to replace water and sewer lines to the house during the road construcƟon next year. Is this a list that's on your website, or can it be emailed to me? Thank you for your Ɵme. > Tim Jones > Van Buren Ave S. > > Sent from my iPad > <Plumbers_Sump List Jan 2024.pdf> Page 867 of 1086 46 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Tuesday, October 15, 2024 1:38 PM To:'Chuck Morse' Subject:RE: contractor information Attachments:Plumbers_Sump List Jan 2024.pdf Chuck, Thank you for reaching out. See the attached list. I’d recommend getting at least two quotes. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Chuck Morse Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 1:03 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: contractor information EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Aaron, I am going to be part of the president project in 2025 and I was at the meeting on 9/24/2024. I am interested in having a sleeve put on my sewer line pending on the price. You mentioned at the meeting that you have a list of contractors that the city of Edina likes to use. Would you please send me their name and numbers so I can reach out to them and have them give me a price. You can email me or you can send it to me at 420 Adams Ave.Hopkins MN 55343 Sincerely, Chuck Morse Page 868 of 1086 47 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Tuesday, October 15, 2024 1:57 PM To:'Tim Jones' Subject:RE: Presidents Neighborhood Road Construction 2025 Tim, It's not necessary in 2024. By June 2025 is preferred. Thank you, Aaron -----Original Message----- From: Tim Jones Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 1:17 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Re: Presidents Neighborhood Road ConstrucƟon 2025 EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I was curious how far out you need to know about a contractor. Is it something that has to be done this year, or is the beginning of 2025 enough Ɵme? Thanks, Tim Jones Sent from my iPad > On Sep 11, 2024, at 5:01 PM, Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: > > Tim, > > Thank you for reaching out. We recommend geƫng at least two quotes from the aƩached contractor list, or other contractors if you wish. If you move forward with a contractor, let us know so we can coordinate with construcƟon in 2025. > > > Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer > 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 > 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 > ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Jones > Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 12:43 PM > To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> > Subject: Presidents Neighborhood Road ConstrucƟon 2025 > Page 869 of 1086 48 > EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. > > > I am a resident of the Presidents neighborhood and would like to get a list of recommended contractors to replace water and sewer lines to the house during the road construcƟon next year. Is this a list that's on your website, or can it be emailed to me? Thank you for your Ɵme. > Tim Jones > Van Buren Ave S. > > Sent from my iPad > <Plumbers_Sump List Jan 2024.pdf> Page 870 of 1086 51 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Friday, October 18, 2024 5:10 PM To: Subject:Survey - Privacy Concerns Yas, I requested our Communications staƯ contact you regarding your privacy / sharing concerns. If they haven’t reached out to you by Thu. 10/24 let me know. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. Page 871 of 1086 53 Aaron Ditzler From:Gayle Hanson Sent:Tuesday, October 22, 2024 3:46 PM To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:Sidewalks EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Sent from my iPhone really don’t want u to put in sidewalks. Gayle hanson 323jefferson Ave so Page 872 of 1086 55 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Thursday, October 24, 2024 4:11 PM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by T. The question that was asked is: Can you update the "Existing" and "Proposed" street views in your "proposed roadway widths" document with more accurately-scaled cars/trucks/suv's? Most modern vehicles are not that narrow and have mirrors that stick out past the body of the car. A ford F150 with standard mirrors is ~96in wide mirror to mirror (8ft). That leaves zero clearance in the drive & parking lanes, unlike the cars that are shown in the presentation. Cars/trucks/suv's need clearance to pass parked and oncoming cars safely. In winter the street will be even more narrow, since snow plows do not clear snow all the way to the curb and snow does not always stay stationary (ie falls back into the street). We will lose another ~1ft of available road width on both sides of the street due to snow. Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 873 of 1086 Page 874 of 1086 62 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Tuesday, October 29, 2024 8:41 AM To:'Jeff J Langaard' Subject:RE: Presidents A&B Roadway Reconstruction Jeff, The 12/9 Public Hearing will begin at 6 PM. You will receive a hard copy mailing about the hearing later in November. Yes, I can arrange a time to meet with you before the hearing. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Jeff J Langaard Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2024 8:14 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Presidents A&B Roadway Reconstruction EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Aaron, Anne, my wife, and I (Jeff Langaard) have lived at 6606 Belmore Ln for over 18-years. We are happy and proud of the great work the City of Edina does for us on an ongoing basis. What time is the Dec 9 public hearing on the Presidents A&B Roadway Reconstruction? Would you be able to stop by and discuss the project in more detail before the Dec 9 meeting? We would only need 20-30 minutes on any Tuesday - Thursday. Thanks. -- Jeff Jeff Langaard Page 875 of 1086 66 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Thursday, October 31, 2024 1:42 PM To: Subject:Edina - Recreational Fires Greg, As we discussed, here is information regarding recreational fires, including contact info and ordinance. https://www.edinamn.gov/732/Recreational-Fires We’ll be in touch regarding your wall. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. Page 876 of 1086 70 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Sunday, November 3, 2024 5:32 PM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by Ryan Cecka. The question that was asked is: What date do I have to sell my home to not be responsible for the assessment? If I do have to pay it. How long do I have to do so? Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 877 of 1086 71 Aaron Ditzler From:Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent:Monday, November 4, 2024 10:32 PM To:Aaron Ditzler; Liz Moore; Chad Millner Subject:A new question has been added to Ask a Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction by Leah Pettit. The question that was asked is: Will all homes in the presidents neighborhood have to pay for the gravel alley improvements to the homes bordering the alley between Washington & Adams, or just the homes bordering those streets will have to pay that assessment? Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team Page 878 of 1086 79 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Wednesday, November 13, 2024 2:05 PM To:'Greg Shank' Subject:RE: Wall and Street Project Greg, Here are two firms that you can reach out to regarding your wall. Marty Gray Gray Engineering, LLC Steve Gale / Nate Lichty Gale Tech Engineering, Inc. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov -----Original Message----- From: Greg Shank Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2024 5:52 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Wall and Street Project EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Aaron we spoke several weeks ago regarding assistance with evaluaƟon and opƟons for the retaining wall at our house 501 Tyler Ct. wondering if you have had Ɵme to look at the situaƟon. We talked about trying to get together and look at it before the street project gets started next spring. Please let me know what your thoughts are. Also could you let me know what the esƟmated cost will be for next year’s project. Thanks,Greg Shank Sent from my iPhone Page 879 of 1086 Page 880 of 1086 Page 881 of 1086 APPENDIX L Proposed Typical Sections Page 882 of 1086 Washington AveExisting: 30’ road width, one-sided parkingWest sideEast sideProposed: 24’ road width, one-sided parking, 8’ shared use path (0-3’ grass boulevard)West sideEast sidePage 883 of 1086 Belmore LnProposed: 24’ road width, one-sided parking, 8’ shared use path (0-3’ grass boulevard)Existing: 30’ road width, two-sided parkingSouth sideNorth sideSouth sideNorth sidePage 884 of 1086 Monroe AveProposed: 24’ road width, one-sided parking, 5’ sidewalk (3-5’ grass boulevard)Existing: 30’ road width, two-sided parkingEast sideWest sideEast sideWest sidePage 885 of 1086 3rdStProposed: 24’ road width, one-sided parking, Ex. 10’ shared use path (0’ grass boulevard)Existing: 30’ road width, two-sided parkingNorth sideSouth sideSouth sideNorth sidePage 886 of 1086 Adams Ave, Jefferson Ave, Madison Ave, Jackson Ave,Van Buren Ave, Harrison Ave, Tyler Ave, Tyler CtExisting: 30’ road width, two-sided parkingProposed: 27’ road width, two-sided parkingPage 887 of 1086 APPENDIX M Preliminary Assessment Roll Page 888 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 1 3011721210001 6651 2ND ST S DOUGLAS A FREEMAN 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 2 3011721210002 6655 2ND ST S HAMID AZADEGAN 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 3 3011721220055 300 ADAMS AVE MEGAN S SCOTT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 4 3011721220051 301 ADAMS AVE ELIZABETH A HELFTER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 5 3011721220056 304 ADAMS AVE KEBBA JAITEN & NYOMI CAMARA 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 6 3011721220050 305 ADAMS AVE T D RETZER & K A RETZER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 7 3011721220057 306 ADAMS AVE R P PETERSEN & M F PETERSEN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 8 3011721220049 307 ADAMS AVE K J SWAN & K M SWAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 9 3011721220058 308 ADAMS AVE ANTHONY J PASKO 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 10 3011721220048 311 ADAMS AVE MARY L SCHWEBEL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 11 3011721220059 314 ADAMS AVE SARAH OSTER & WADE FALK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 12 3011721220047 315 ADAMS AVE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 13 3011721220060 316 ADAMS AVE WADE C & SARAH FALK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 14 3011721220046 317 ADAMS AVE ANDIE R KUEBLER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 15 3011721220061 318 ADAMS AVE BETTY ROBLING 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 16 3011721220045 319 ADAMS AVE MARK W ADOLPHSON ET AL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 17 3011721220062 320 ADAMS AVE TONY LEGKY & VERA LEGKY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 18 3011721220044 323 ADAMS AVE ELIZABETH D ELLITHORPE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 19 3011721220073 400 ADAMS AVE JOSHUA D SHACKELFORD ET AL 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 20 3011721220111 401 ADAMS AVE ZACHARY L SINN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 21 3011721220074 404 ADAMS AVE M F KROLAK & R A KROLAK 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 22 3011721220110 405 ADAMS AVE J D BUTZ & C BUTZ 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 23 3011721220075 406 ADAMS AVE MARY J MARTENIS 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 24 3011721220076 408 ADAMS AVE RYAN LLOYD CECKA 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 25 3011721220109 409 ADAMS AVE ELI D LIBSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 26 3011721220108 411 ADAMS AVE R M HESSIAN & B L HESSIAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 27 3011721220077 412 ADAMS AVE R & W SNOW 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 28 3011721220107 413 ADAMS AVE MARK ULRICH & SARAH ULRICH 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 29 3011721220106 415 ADAMS AVE BRIAN DANELL & LINDA DANELL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 30 3011721220078 416 ADAMS AVE MICHAEL KERFELD/ZOE DARLING 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 31 3011721220105 419 ADAMS AVE STEVEN JOHN OLSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 32 3011721220079 420 ADAMS AVE C V MORSE & J A MORSE REV TR 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 33 3011721220080 422 ADAMS AVE C W RENAUX & E H RENAUX 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 34 3011721220104 423 ADAMS AVE WADE W LARKIN JR 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT Page 1 of 9 Page 889 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 35 3011721220103 425 ADAMS AVE AMERICAN ESTATE AND TRUST LC 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 36 3011721210027 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CITY OF HOPKINS 0 -$ -$ -$ 37 3011721210162 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND 0 -$ -$ -$ 38 3011721210005 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED VILLAGE OF EDINA 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 39 3011721120094 6528 BELMORE LA NATHAN SMITH & ALEXX SMITH 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 40 3011721210167 6600 BELMORE LA T L ELDER & J K ELDER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 41 3011721210136 6601 BELMORE LA KEVIN BENNETT/BROOKE BENNETT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 42 3011721210168 6606 BELMORE LA J J LANGAARD & A W LANGAARD 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 43 3011721210019 6612 BELMORE LA J M ANDERSON & P E ANDERSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 44 3011721210166 6615 BELMORE LA DAVID CLEARY TRUST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 45 3011721210028 300 HARRISON AVE S DORIS LAMOUREUX 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 46 3011721210026 301 HARRISON AVE S ANDREW F QUIRT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 47 3011721210029 302 HARRISON AVE S JOHN N MORTON & ABBEY MORTON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 48 3011721210025 305 HARRISON AVE S CLAUDIA J EGGAN TRUSTEE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 49 3011721210030 306 HARRISON AVE S KEVIN T LAUX 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 50 3011721210024 307 HARRISON AVE S MAXINE WOODSTROM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 51 3011721210031 308 HARRISON AVE S L T BONNER & S A BONNER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 52 3011721210032 310 HARRISON AVE S CANDICE S LABARRE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 53 3011721210023 311 HARRISON AVE S D G RANEY & R C RANEY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 54 3011721210033 312 HARRISON AVE S MARY K ROSS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 55 3011721210034 314 HARRISON AVE S JEFFREY L DONAT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 56 3011721210022 315 HARRISON AVE S LOWELL W & JEANINE BLISS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 57 3011721210021 317 HARRISON AVE S D E JOYCE & T C KEOGAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 58 3011721210035 318 HARRISON AVE S DANIEL G & JACALYN R LARSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 59 3011721210020 319 HARRISON AVE S SAM E GAVIN & TAMARA M GAVIN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 60 3011721210036 320 HARRISON AVE S GABRIELE LO PINTO 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 61 3011721210037 322 HARRISON AVE S RONALD HONSE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 62 3011721210163 400 HARRISON AVE S G J BERNHARDT & N K SHANK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 63 3011721210153 401 HARRISON AVE S AMBER K HOWARD 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 64 3011721210164 404 HARRISON AVE S T W PETERSON & P S PETERSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 65 3011721210152 405 HARRISON AVE S S L & W F HOTTINGER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ Page 2 of 9 Page 890 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 66 3011721210116 406 HARRISON AVE S MATTHEW A CHU 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 67 3011721210151 407 HARRISON AVE S R E HARRIS & J N HARRIS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 68 3011721210117 408 HARRISON AVE S T A & V M FRANDRUP 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 69 3011721210150 409 HARRISON AVE S SUET JEAN SIEK & JAVAN ANG 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 70 3011721210149 411 HARRISON AVE S ANNE C DAVIDSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 71 3011721210154 412 HARRISON AVE S MARIAN K PORETTI 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 72 3011721210120 414 HARRISON AVE S VIRGINIA M VONHOF 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 73 3011721210148 415 HARRISON AVE S EVELYN LOUISE KELLAMS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 74 3011721210121 416 HARRISON AVE S N MONTGOMERY/S MONTGOMERY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 75 3011721210122 418 HARRISON AVE S FELIX M GRIEDER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 76 3011721210147 419 HARRISON AVE S LAUREL M CORGARD 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 77 3011721210123 420 HARRISON AVE S BROOKE DAHNERT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 78 3011721210146 421 HARRISON AVE S DELIP K ALLADIN/S L ALLADIN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 79 3011721210124 424 HARRISON AVE S ERIC AHO & NICHOLE J AHO 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 80 3011721210145 425 HARRISON AVE S J W HINKENS & A A DUCHON 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 81 3011721210069 400 JACKSON AVE S LOWELL K THOMPSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 82 3011721210112 401 JACKSON AVE S MICHAEL STONEBURNER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 83 3011721210111 403 JACKSON AVE S C M JOHNSON/R D BREITENSTEIN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 84 3011721210070 404 JACKSON AVE S JUDY ANN EGGAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 85 3011721210071 406 JACKSON AVE S M G LURIE & L B ROBINOW 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 86 3011721210110 407 JACKSON AVE S MARK HARRIS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 87 3011721210072 408 JACKSON AVE S JULI MANZ & EUGENE MANZ 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 88 3011721210109 409 JACKSON AVE S CHAPIN STITT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 89 3011721210073 410 JACKSON AVE S JANE D MCWILLIAMS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 90 3011721210108 411 JACKSON AVE S MICHELLE R BRAUN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 91 3011721210107 413 JACKSON AVE S NADINE BROHOLM TRUSTEE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 92 3011721210074 414 JACKSON AVE S A A KING & M J DARDIS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 93 3011721210075 416 JACKSON AVE S S SHEKHAR & C SKEKHAR 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 94 3011721210106 417 JACKSON AVE S T J CONDON ET AL W/L EST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 95 3011721210076 418 JACKSON AVE S GRACE NIMMONS & JOSH NIMMONS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 96 3011721210105 419 JACKSON AVE S MATTHEW D & LORI S LILLY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 97 3011721210077 420 JACKSON AVE S M F BERG & DANIELLE N BERG 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 98 3011721210104 421 JACKSON AVE S R & J MORTENSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 99 3011721210103 423 JACKSON AVE S YAS BAKSHIAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ Page 3 of 9 Page 891 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 100 3011721210078 424 JACKSON AVE S JOHN ANDERSON/JULIE ANDERSON 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 101 3011721210102 425 JACKSON AVE S PATRICK J A & SONJA L COOL 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 102 3011721220036 300 JEFFERSON AVE S MICHAEL R MARTINEAU 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 103 3011721220035 301 JEFFERSON AVE S ERIC MENCK & LAURA N MENCK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 104 3011721220037 304 JEFFERSON AVE S JANE OPOIEN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 105 3011721220034 305 JEFFERSON AVE S M J SCHULZE & K M DEMAROIS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 106 3011721220038 306 JEFFERSON AVE S J J FREY & J E FREY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 107 3011721220033 307 JEFFERSON AVE S WILLIAM RANDOLPH HOULTON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 108 3011721220039 308 JEFFERSON AVE S H & D ARNDT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 109 3011721220032 309 JEFFERSON AVE S D H CACKA & A D CACKA 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 110 3011721220040 312 JEFFERSON AVE S TUAN NGO & SARAH NGO 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 111 3011721220031 313 JEFFERSON AVE S A R HERRLEY & K L BUDDENSIEK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 112 3011721220041 314 JEFFERSON AVE S MARK BARON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 113 3011721220030 317 JEFFERSON AVE S S D LARSON & R L LARSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 114 3011721220042 318 JEFFERSON AVE S ROBERT H HENNEN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 115 3011721220029 319 JEFFERSON AVE S MATTHEW COLLINS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 116 3011721220043 322 JEFFERSON AVE S PAUL C MILLER/ANNA M MILLER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 117 3011721220028 323 JEFFERSON AVE S GAYLE R HANSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 118 3011721220091 400 JEFFERSON AVE S M SCHUMACHER & C SCHUMACHER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 119 3011721220131 401 JEFFERSON AVE S RONALD E DAVIS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 120 3011721220092 402 JEFFERSON AVE S TERRENCE W RIXE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 121 3011721220130 403 JEFFERSON AVE S MICHAEL A LACK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 122 3011721220093 404 JEFFERSON AVE S GREGORY WILKINSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 123 3011721220129 405 JEFFERSON AVE S DEREK P MADDOX 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 124 3011721220094 406 JEFFERSON AVE S E R ANDERSON & R ANDERSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 125 3011721220095 408 JEFFERSON AVE S J B & C D SMART 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 126 3011721220128 409 JEFFERSON AVE S ROBERT L KILIAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 127 3011721220127 411 JEFFERSON AVE S PETER MOREAU & JENNA MOREAU 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 128 3011721220096 412 JEFFERSON AVE S ESTEBAN JIMENEZ FLORES 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 129 3011721220097 414 JEFFERSON AVE S T M JAROSZ & K M HIBBS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 130 3011721220126 415 JEFFERSON AVE S S & D NELSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 131 3011721220098 416 JEFFERSON AVE S STEPHANIE HEISSER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 132 3011721220125 417 JEFFERSON AVE S L MCKNIGHT & T FRAZIER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 133 3011721220099 418 JEFFERSON AVE S S C SANCHEZ & J S JARQUIN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ Page 4 of 9 Page 892 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 134 3011721220100 420 JEFFERSON AVE S YVONNE R CHRISTIANSEN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 135 3011721220124 421 JEFFERSON AVE S PATRICK W BEVINS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 136 3011721220101 422 JEFFERSON AVE S I O & A M NYAMBURI 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 137 3011721220123 423 JEFFERSON AVE S ANDREA M HEATON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 138 3011721220102 424 JEFFERSON AVE S THOMAS PAUL DEICK TR ET AL 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 139 3011721220122 425 JEFFERSON AVE S M ANDERSON & C ANDERSON 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 140 3011721220020 300 MADISON AVE S JAMES J PEDRIC REVOCABLE TR 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 141 3011721220019 303 MADISON AVE S SHARON L SCHAFFHAUSEN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 142 3011721220021 304 MADISON AVE S MICHAEL G PAKENHAM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 143 3011721220018 305 MADISON AVE S MARILYN C DIETZ 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 144 3011721220022 306 MADISON AVE S W HENN AFFORDBL HSG LND TRST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 145 3011721220017 307 MADISON AVE S COLT M CRAMER ET AL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 146 3011721220023 308 MADISON AVE S C A REMINGTON/J M REMINGTON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 147 3011721220016 309 MADISON AVE S COLT M CRAMER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 148 3011721220015 311 MADISON AVE S ANTHONY ARENS & MARGO ARENS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 149 3011721220024 312 MADISON AVE S PATRICIA J SUNDBERG 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 150 3011721220014 313 MADISON AVE S J L M BLACKMAN/J B BLACKMAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 151 3011721220013 315 MADISON AVE S SYLVIE J ZACHARKEVICS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 152 3011721220025 316 MADISON AVE S MARGARET P SCHMIT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 153 3011721220012 317 MADISON AVE S P B DUBOIS & D C DUBOIS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 154 3011721220011 319 MADISON AVE S TRACEY ZAVADIL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 155 3011721220026 320 MADISON AVE S JOSEPH HAUER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 156 3011721220010 321 MADISON AVE S NATHAN KUBIK & ANNE ROLLINS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 157 3011721220027 322 MADISON AVE S STEVEN V HOLWEGER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 158 3011721220009 323 MADISON AVE S NANCY MARIE HART 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 159 3011721220112 400 MADISON AVE S EAST & WEST LLC 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 160 3011721220152 401 MADISON AVE S C HYSER & D ANDERSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 161 3011721220113 402 MADISON AVE S J E HENNESSEY/T E HENNESSEY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 162 3011721220151 403 MADISON AVE S G MCLAIN & C J MCLAIN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 163 3011721220114 404 MADISON AVE S T J BIENAPFL & H M BIENAPFL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 164 3011721220150 405 MADISON AVE S MARIA DIETZ 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 165 3011721220154 407 MADISON AVE S BRUCE E & JANE M BRABEC 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 166 3011721220115 408 MADISON AVE S THOMAS C & SARAH ANGELL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 167 3011721220116 410 MADISON AVE S RYAN STALEY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ Page 5 of 9 Page 893 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 168 3011721220147 411 MADISON AVE S M T MALLOY & D A NEWSTROM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 169 3011721220117 414 MADISON AVE S D D & T I THISIUS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 170 3011721220146 415 MADISON AVE S LINDA D WALEN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 171 3011721220118 416 MADISON AVE S JOSEPH AARON KRALL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 172 3011721220145 417 MADISON AVE S LANCE A GREVIOUS ET AL TRSTS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 173 3011721220119 418 MADISON AVE S JAMES E NORDSTROM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 174 3011721220144 419 MADISON AVE S S L REED & C W MAHLER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 175 3011721220120 422 MADISON AVE S S THOMPSON & S A HENDRICKSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 176 3011721220143 423 MADISON AVE S PAUL M LOPEZ 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 177 3011721220121 424 MADISON AVE S MICHAEL D LANG 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 178 3011721220142 425 MADISON AVE S CHAD BUECHLER 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 179 3011721210004 299 MONROE AVE S SARAH WALZ & GREGORY WALZ 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 180 3011721220001 300 MONROE AVE S KAREN KAY CURRAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 181 3011721210068 301 MONROE AVE S J D KIRCHNER & A KIRCHNER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 182 3011721220002 302 MONROE AVE S THOMAS J WENDEL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 183 3011721210067 303 MONROE AVE S COLIN MARNACH/SARAH MARNACH 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 184 3011721210066 305 MONROE AVE S BRUCE M JUST ETAL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 185 3011721220003 306 MONROE AVE S J P NIGHTINGALE ETAL SUBJ/LE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 186 3011721220004 308 MONROE AVE S MICHAEL W FELDMAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 187 3011721210065 309 MONROE AVE S JILL BERGERUD 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 188 3011721210064 311 MONROE AVE S ANDREW T BERG 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 189 3011721220005 314 MONROE AVE S W & R JUST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 190 3011721210063 315 MONROE AVE S SHELLEY RAE MARTINEAU 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 191 3011721220006 316 MONROE AVE S JAMES G & JOYCE M REYNOLDS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 192 3011721210062 317 MONROE AVE S TORY M SCHAEFER/M H SCHAEFER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 193 3011721220007 318 MONROE AVE S HANAN Z SABRI 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 194 3011721220008 322 MONROE AVE S DANIEL WENGENROTH 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 195 3011721210061 323 MONROE AVE S JEFFREY MULFINGER & C DEZIO 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 196 3011721220132 400 MONROE AVE S MORE GOOD TIMES LLC 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 197 3011721210090 401 MONROE AVE S M MEADE & K LAFOND 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 198 3011721220133 402 MONROE AVE S PRIME HOLDINGS LLC 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 199 3011721210089 403 MONROE AVE S J J GRINSEL & D GRINSEL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 200 3011721220134 404 MONROE AVE S W HENN AFFORDBL HSG LND TRST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 201 3011721210088 405 MONROE AVE S EVERETT A & BRENDA SPANDL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ Page 6 of 9 Page 894 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 202 3011721210087 407 MONROE AVE S JOSEPH R PETERSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 203 3011721220136 408 MONROE AVE S M C ANDERSON & M L ANDERSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 204 3011721210086 409 MONROE AVE S SARA E TASLER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 205 3011721220135 410 MONROE AVE S NICOLLE THIES 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 206 3011721210085 411 MONROE AVE S C J STRACKE/A J STRACKE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 207 3011721220137 414 MONROE AVE S T-S & M M LEE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 208 3011721210084 415 MONROE AVE S S B ANDERSON ETAL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 209 3011721220138 416 MONROE AVE S KELLY M BOTTENBERG 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 210 3011721210083 417 MONROE AVE S NATHAN E STANERSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 211 3011721210082 419 MONROE AVE S CLARICE S EATON TRUSTEE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 212 3011721220139 420 MONROE AVE S BEVERLY NEWSTROM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 213 3011721220140 422 MONROE AVE S MERRY L DUFFY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 214 3011721210081 423 MONROE AVE S JUDSON KOEHN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 215 3011721220141 424 MONROE AVE S CAITLIN MADDEN/ALEC LIDSTONE 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 216 3011721210155 425 MONROE AVE S PARKER W ERDALL 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 217 3011721120075 401 TYLER AVE S DAMON G OPLAND 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 218 3011721210137 402 TYLER AVE S KATHERINE M GRAHAM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 219 3011721210138 404 TYLER AVE S MARY ANN G HARDING 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 220 3011721120076 405 TYLER AVE S CAROL W SCHULER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 221 3011721210139 406 TYLER AVE S GERALD SIMONICH 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 222 3011721120077 409 TYLER AVE S EMMA CORINA LUGENBILL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 223 3011721120078 411 TYLER AVE S P E FINKE & M J FINKE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 224 3011721210140 412 TYLER AVE S JENKINS FAMILY TRUST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 225 3011721210141 414 TYLER AVE S P SCHOLEN & N AUZENNE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 226 3011721120071 415 TYLER AVE S JOHN WOLF 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 227 3011721210142 418 TYLER AVE S W B MOELLER & K E MOELLER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 228 3011721120070 419 TYLER AVE S KATHERINE PAYNE LIVING TRUST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 229 3011721120079 421 TYLER AVE S SIRI L PRAX & BLAIR PRAX 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 230 3011721210143 422 TYLER AVE S W L WILLNER & MARY B WILLNER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 231 3011721210144 424 TYLER AVE S DALTON GRAFF 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 232 3011721240012 500 TYLER CT WEST HENNEPIN AFFRD HSG TSRT 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 233 3011721130002 501 TYLER CT GREGORY W SHANK ETAL 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 234 3011721130003 505 TYLER CT JAMES D STEIN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 235 3011721240013 508 TYLER CT W S STEINKE & A K STEINKE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ Page 7 of 9 Page 895 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 236 3011721130004 509 TYLER CT K F MCNICHOLS & L MCNICHOLS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 237 3011721240014 512 TYLER CT PETER M HUCH & WIFE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 238 3011721130005 513 TYLER CT DANIEL COX & MEGAN NALEZNY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 239 3011721240015 516 TYLER CT CORINNE R WILES 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 240 3011721130085 517 TYLER CT THOMAS BARRETT PATIN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 241 3011721240016 520 TYLER CT M P SONNEN & E G WITKOWSKY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 242 3011721210003 298 VAN BUREN AVE S WAYNE K WONG ET AL 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 243 3011721210048 300 VAN BUREN AVE S JUNE ATSUKO IGE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 244 3011721210047 301 VAN BUREN AVE S METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 245 3011721210049 302 VAN BUREN AVE S BRIAN MILLER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 246 3011721210046 303 VAN BUREN AVE S K L MASER/L M AMUNDSON ET AL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 247 3011721210050 304 VAN BUREN AVE S J H RODGERS & M M RODGERS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 248 3011721210045 305 VAN BUREN AVE S DAVID POBOISK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 249 3011721210051 306 VAN BUREN AVE S JOHN P & JANET L STINCHFIELD 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 250 3011721210052 308 VAN BUREN AVE S S TWELVES & K M VOGEL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 251 3011721210044 309 VAN BUREN AVE S T J UNDIS & J L UNDIS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 252 3011721210053 310 VAN BUREN AVE S K PALMERSHEIM/J PALMERSHEIM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 253 3011721210043 311 VAN BUREN AVE S WENDY A WILLIAMS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 254 3011721210054 312 VAN BUREN AVE S MARNIE CARLSON/GARY CLEMMER 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 255 3011721210042 313 VAN BUREN AVE S MELVYN J WALLNER LIV TRUST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 256 3011721210055 314 VAN BUREN AVE S DALE E ZIMMERMAN & WIFE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 257 3011721210041 315 VAN BUREN AVE S K M DUFFNEY & S T DUFFNEY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 258 3011721210056 316 VAN BUREN AVE S JAMES STUART KAY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 259 3011721210040 317 VAN BUREN AVE S ERIC R FALK & ELEANOR FALK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 260 3011721210057 318 VAN BUREN AVE S EVERETT L FERRIAN ETAL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 261 3011721210039 319 VAN BUREN AVE S TANNER HOLMQUIST 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 262 3011721210058 320 VAN BUREN AVE S M J FERGUSON & J A FERGUSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 263 3011721210059 322 VAN BUREN AVE S B D BOYD & C L BOYD 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 264 3011721210038 323 VAN BUREN AVE S JOHN MARK EIFERT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 265 3011721210091 400 VAN BUREN AVE S K W MURPHY & P MURPHY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 266 3011721210092 402 VAN BUREN AVE S B & L WILSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 267 3011721210093 404 VAN BUREN AVE S SEEXENG LEE & IRIYA LEE 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 268 3011721210165 405 VAN BUREN AVE S CHARLES J & DEMETRIA THEROS 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 269 3011721210094 406 VAN BUREN AVE S JAMES R WERNESS ET AL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ Page 8 of 9 Page 896 of 1086 PRESIDENTS A/B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-466 AND A-293 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Roadway Alley PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 270 3011721210095 408 VAN BUREN AVE S RAY CHARLES SMITH 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 271 3011721210130 409 VAN BUREN AVE S CHRISTOPHER R VICTOR 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 272 3011721210096 410 VAN BUREN AVE S T J JONES & L R E JONES 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 273 3011721210131 411 VAN BUREN AVE S P C NELSON & R H NELSON 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 274 3011721210097 414 VAN BUREN AVE S K J PAGE & A M CUNNINGHAM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 275 3011721210156 415 VAN BUREN AVE S JANE M TIMM 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 276 3011721210098 416 VAN BUREN AVE S ROBERT J HALL 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 277 3011721210099 418 VAN BUREN AVE S LEAH M BYRD 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 278 3011721210127 419 VAN BUREN AVE S DANIEL COLESTOCK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 279 3011721210100 422 VAN BUREN AVE S TARYN ELIZABETH FRANZNICK 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 280 3011721210126 423 VAN BUREN AVE S HUGH M REICHERT 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 281 3011721210101 424 VAN BUREN AVE S MICHAEL B LARKIN 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 282 3011721210125 425 VAN BUREN AVE S J N H FAWCETT & B J MAEDER 0.5 4,300.00$ -$ 4,300.00$ 283 3011721220070 301 WASHINGTON AVE S SCOTT H OLSON 1.6 13,760.00$ -$ 13,760.00$ 284 3011721220069 307 WASHINGTON AVE S TWO GUYS ENTERPRISE LLC 1.6 13,760.00$ -$ 13,760.00$ 285 3011721220068 309 WASHINGTON AVE S MICHAEL JUBERT & LAURA MOE 1.6 13,760.00$ -$ 13,760.00$ 286 3011721220067 313 WASHINGTON AVE S CHRISTINE L MACK REVOC TRUST 1.6 13,760.00$ -$ 13,760.00$ 287 3011721220066 317 WASHINGTON AVE S ADE HOME SERVICES LLC 1.6 13,760.00$ -$ 13,760.00$ 288 3011721220065 321 WASHINGTON AVE S N J COLLERAN & C K DAUWEN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 289 3011721220064 323 WASHINGTON AVE S MAX MANA LEUTBOUNSHU 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 290 3011721220063 325 WASHINGTON AVE S WYATT JENSEN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 291 3011721220090 401 WASHINGTON AVE S T J DONOVAN & W L DONOVAN 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 292 3011721220089 403 WASHINGTON AVE S R M LATHAM & A FELDT LATHAM 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 293 3011721220088 405 WASHINGTON AVE S CAROLYN TAYLOR PETERSON 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 294 3011721220087 407 WASHINGTON AVE S ALEXANDER SCOTT CHRISTENSEN 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 295 3011721220086 409 WASHINGTON AVE S ROBERT J LUNIESKI 1 8,600.00$ 1 1,300.00$ 9,900.00$ 296 3011721220085 413 WASHINGTON AVE S KATHERYN M ZACHARY 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 297 3011721220084 415 WASHINGTON AVE S MARY C RYAN 1 8,600.00$ -$ 8,600.00$ 298 3011721220083 417 WASHINGTON AVE S WATERSTONE INVESTMENTS INC 1.6 13,760.00$ -$ 13,760.00$ 299 3011721220082 421 WASHINGTON AVE S J & A O'NEILL 1.6 13,760.00$ -$ 13,760.00$ 300 3011721210060 6750 BELMORE LA CITY OF EDINA 4 34,400.00$ -$ 34,400.00$ 301 3011721220156 6940 MALONEY AVE B CASTANEDA & F J C GNZ LUNA 0.4 3,440.00$ -$ 3,440.00$ TOTAL 293.6 2,524,960$ 9 11,700$ 2,536,660$ Page 9 of 9 Page 897 of 1086 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates November 21, 2024, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement Nos. BA-466 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 18 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 21st day of Nov. 2024. ________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Page 898 of 1086 Pid Tax name Tax add l1 Tax add l2 Tax add l3 Current resident Address Sub id1 Ctu name State code Zip DRAKE A HUNTER 319 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 319 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CHRISTINE L MACK 1165 BLACK OAKS LN N PLYMOUTH MN 55447 313 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRADLEY ALEXANDER 425 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 425 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ERIC AHO & NICHOLE J AHO 424 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 424 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 RICHARD E HARRIS 407 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 407 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 GRACE NIMMONS & JOSH NIMMONS 6217 BELMORE LANE HOPKINS MN 55343 418 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRIAN D BOYD 3345 EVEREST CT N PLYMOUTH MN 55447 322 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRIAN DANELL & LINDA DANELL 415 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 415 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 EMMA CORINA LUGENBILL 1805 QUARRY RIDGE #303 ROCHESTER MN 55901 409 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 CANDICE S LABARRE 310 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 310 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JEROME MANLEY & JULIE MANLEY 325 WASHINGTON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 325 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 TREVOR ABEL & MEAGAN ABEL 400 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 400 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 BENJAMIN M SWENSON 419 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 419 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 SCOTT H OLSON 21235 RADISSON RD SHOREWOOD MN 55331 301 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 HOWARD ACKERMAN P.O. BOX 5561 HOPKINS, MN 55343 317 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ROBERT M LATHAM 403 WASHINGTON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 403 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CYNTHIA K BRUNES 308 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 308 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ROBERT J LUNIESKI 7645 LYNDALE AVE S 250 RICHFIELD MN 55423 409 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JAMES G & JOYCE M REYNOLDS 316 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 316 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 ANGELICA STOFFEL 405 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 405 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 THOMAS A & VICTORIA FRANDRUP 408 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 408 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 KEVIN T LAUX 306 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 306 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ANDREA M HEATON 4615 WHITE OAK RD MINNETONKA MN 55345 423 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DANIEL H & ANDREA D CACKA 309 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 309 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARY L SCHWEBEL 311 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 311 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 WENDY A WILLIAMS 311 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 311 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 CATHERINE MARY JOHNSON 403 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 403 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARIAN K PORETTI 412 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 412 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 THOMAS ANGELL 408 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 408 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MATTHEW MICHAUD 402 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 402 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 W HENN AFFORDBL HSG LND TRST 5100 THIMSEN AVE #120 MINNETONKA MN 55345 316 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 GREGORY MEYER 418 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 418 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 PABLO TRUJILLO 303 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 303 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 COLT M CRAMER 309 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 309 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 WILLIAM & SHERRY HOTTINGER 405 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 405 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ALEXANDRE SAVELLI 5712 FAIRFAX AVE EDINA MN 55424 403 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 GAVIN MCLAIN 6728 VALLEY VIEW RD EDINA MN 55439 403 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ALI GOLDBERG 422 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 422 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 WILLIAM L WILLNER 422 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 422 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 THOMAS W PETERSON 404 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 404 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 E A STERN & J J FUNK 416 ADAMS AVE HOPKINS MN 55343 416 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 MCCLOUD LLC 5660 COMSTOCK LA N PLYMOUTH MN 55446 415 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JUDY ANN EGGAN 404 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 404 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 Page 899 of 1086 C R WILES 516 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 516 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 GREGORY W SHANK 501 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 501 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 DANIEL COX & MEGAN NALEZNY 513 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 513 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 BRUCE M JUST 305 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 305 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 390 ROBERT ST N ST PAUL MN 55101 315 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 JEFFREY J LANGAARD 6606 BELMORE LA EDINA MN 55343 6606 BELMORE LN EDINA MN 55343 RICK P & MARGARET F PETERSEN 306 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 306 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 M J SCHULZE & K M DEMAROIS 305 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 305 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 RAY CHARLES SMITH 408 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 408 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 KRISTIN M DUFFNEY 315 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 315 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 NICHOLAS HAYES 414 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 414 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 TC HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 1954 UNIVERSITY AVE W ST PAUL MN 55104 318 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 SCOTT TWELVES 308 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 308 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 RYAN LLOYD CECKA 28604 DOLPHIN ST NW ZIMMERMAN MN 55398 408 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 LAYLA MOSTAGHIMI 307 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 307 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DALE D & TERESA I THISIUS 414 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 414 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 RICHARD AZEVEDO 302 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 302 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 KEVIN F MCNICHOLS 509 TYLER COURT EDINA MN 55343 509 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 ANTHONY J ARENS 311 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 311 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CHARLES J THEROS 405 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 405 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 TAE-SUNG & MICHELLE M LEE 414 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 414 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 JAMES S CONDON 417 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 417 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JOSEPH HAUER 320 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 320 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MORE GOOD TIMES LLC 910 CHESTNUT ST MATORVILLE MN 55955 400 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 SARA E TASLER 409 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 409 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 DYLAN STYPULA 417 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 417 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 NATHAN E STANERSON 417 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 417 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 MICHAEL W FELDMAN 308 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 308 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 JOHN O'NEILL 3501 14TH AVE S #2 MPLS MN 55407 421 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 KAAREN HOWE/LEILANI HOTALING 418 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 418 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 SYLVIE NGUYEN DUOC 315 MADISON AVE HOPKINS MN 55343 315 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 SARAH SHEKHAR 416 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 416 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 M G LURIE & L B ROBINOW 406 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 406 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JACK W HINKENS 425 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 425 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CASEY HELBLING 320 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 320 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARK BARON AND JING WEI 314 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 314 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 SIRI L PRAX & BLAIR PRAX 421 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 421 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 ANTHONY J PASKO 308 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 308 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 JAMES STUART KAY 316 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 316 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 CLAUDIA J EGGAN 305 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 305 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MOLLY TRUSZINSKI 405 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 405 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 DANIEL WENGENROTH 322 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 322 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 SARAH J WALZ 299 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 299 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 DALE E ZIMMERMAN 314 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 314 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 Page 900 of 1086 MARLYS L PEDRIC 15816 LUND RD N EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55346 300 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 PAUL M LOPEZ 423 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 423 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ELIZABETH A LAGORIO 416 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 416 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JUDITH M ANDERSON 6612 BELMORE LA EDINA MN 55343 6612 BELMORE LN EDINA MN 55343 MARNIE CARLSON 312 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 312 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 JENNY MAURICIO 420 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 420 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 KEBBA JAITEN & NYOMI CAMARA 304 ADAMS AVE S EDINA MN 55343 304 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 I O & A M NYAMBURI 422 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 422 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DEREK P MADDOX 405 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 405 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JAMES J FREY 306 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 306 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 RONALD HONSE 322 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 322 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 KAREN KAY CURRAN 300 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 300 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 MERRY L DUFFY 422 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 422 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 LOUISE KELLAMS 415 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 415 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARY ANN G HARDING 404 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 404 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 DELIP K ALLADIN 421 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 421 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 LINDA D WALEN 415 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 415 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ROGER E MORTENSON 421 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 421 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DAMON G OPLAND 401 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 401 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 DAVID BRANDNER 3131 EXCELSIOR BLVD #512 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55416 404 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DAVID E JOYCE 317 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 317 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CHAPIN STITT 409 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 409 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 THOMAS LITHGOW/ANGIE LITHGOW 309 WASHINGTON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 309 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CHRISTIAN W RENAUX 422 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 422 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 CHRISTOPHER R VICTOR 409 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 409 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 AARON JOSEPH HILL 323 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 323 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 JANE E HENNESSEY 402 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 402 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ERIC R FALK & ELEANOR FALK 4417 CLAREMORE DR MINNEAPOLIS MN 55435 317 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRENT A PHILLIPS 402 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 402 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ERIC L DEBLIECK 411 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 411 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 JUNE ATSUKO IGE 300 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 300 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 COLT M CRAMER 309 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 307 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JOSHUA & LYNDIE SHACKELFORD 5512 MCGUIRE RD EDINA MN 55439 400 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 SCOTT D & RENEE L LARSON 317 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 317 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JILL BERGERUD 309 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 309 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 PETER E FINKE 411 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 411 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRIDGET CASTANEDA 6940 MALONEY AVE EDINA MN 55343 6940 MALONEY AVE EDINA MN 55343 ELIZABETH D ELLITHORPE 323 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 323 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRUCE E BARRINGER 155 WILDHURST RD TONKA BAY MN 55331 323 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ERIC MENCK & LAURA N MENCK 301 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 301 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 T J BIENAPFL & H M BIENAPFL 404 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 404 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 KEVIN & KATHLEEN SWAN 307 ADAMS AVE S HOPKINS MN 55343 307 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 ROGERT JOHN HALL 416 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 416 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 THOMAS J UNDIS 309 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 309 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 Page 901 of 1086 MATTHEW KERNS AND LEA KERNS 425 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 425 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 SAMUEL G HUFF 420 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 420 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 LORRAINE E MCKNIGHT 417 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 417 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JOHN WILLIAM MCKENNA 420 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 420 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 LOWELL K THOMPSON 400 JACKSON AVE S HOPKINS MN 55343 400 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CARLEY TABATT 424 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 424 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 PETER S MOREAU 411 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 411 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ELIZABETH A MEYER-MALKERSON 410 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 410 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 ANNA ELLIS & CODY ELLIS 304 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 304 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ZACHARY A WORTHY 402 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 402 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 MICHAEL STONEBURNER 401 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 401 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CARTER PRICE 401 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 401 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 TIMOTHY J & LUAN R E JONES 410 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 410 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 AMBER K HOWARD 401 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 401 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 TRACI L ELDER 6600 BELMORE LA EDINA MN 55343 6600 BELMORE LN EDINA MN 55343 JAMES D STEIN 505 TYLER CT HOPKINS MN 55343 505 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 JORDAN WICK & LEAH PETTIT 406 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 406 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JACOB D KIRCHNER 301 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 301 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 VIRGINIA M VONHOF 414 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 414 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 HAMID AZADEGAN 17559 TOFT COVE EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 6655 2ND ST EDINA MN 55343 SHELLEY RAE MARTINEAU 315 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 315 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 STEPHANIE HEISSER 416 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 416 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 STEVEN & DAWN NELSON 415 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 415 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MEGAN S SCOTT 300 ADAMS AVE HOPKINS MN 55343 300 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 TYLER D RETZER 305 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 305 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 NICK MADRYGA/LINDSAY MADRYGA 303 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 303 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 CAROL W SCHULER 405 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 405 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 ESTEBAN JIMENEZ FLORES 412 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 412 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 SARAH FALK & WADE FALK 314 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 314 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 WILLIAM J JUST 314 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 314 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 BROOKE MADISON BARTHOLOMEW 306 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 306 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 WILLIAM RANDOLPH HOULTON 307 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 307 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 CHARLES V & JUDY A MORSE, TR 420 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 420 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 DOUGLAS & RONELL RANEY 311 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 311 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 NATHAN W & ALEXX N SMITH 6528 BELMORE LA HOPKINS MN 55343 6528 BELMORE LN EDINA MN 55343 PATRICK W BEVINS 421 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 421 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ANDIE R PATERSON 317 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 317 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 MICHAEL R MARTINEAU 300 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 300 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 390 ROBERT ST N ST PAUL MN 55101 301 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 KRISTINA POOLER 410 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 410 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 J N H FAWCETT & B J MAEDER 425 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 425 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 TORY M SCHAEFER 317 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 317 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 STEPHEN S OLSON 500 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 500 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 NADINE E BROHOLM 413 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 413 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 Page 902 of 1086 G J BERNHARDT & N K SHANK 400 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 400 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARTY C ANDERSON 408 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 408 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 NATHAN A GORR 319 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 319 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARILYN C DIETZ 305 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 305 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 STANDLY B ANDERSON 415 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 415 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 FELIX M GRIEDER P O BOX 2501 UNIVERSAL CITY TX 78148 418 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 KENNETH W JENKINS 14330 SPORTS CLUB WAY ORLANDO FL 32837 412 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 M P SONNEN & E G WITKOWSKY 520 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 520 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 MELODY M SNYDER 404 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 404 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 NICHOLAS A WIMMER 415 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 415 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 PARKER W ERDALL 425 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 425 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 KEITH JOHN PAGE 414 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 414 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 JAMES R WERNESS 406 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 406 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 ANCLEM 424 LLC 10798 CEDAR BLVD MINNETONKA MN 55305 424 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MICHAEL T MALLOY 411 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 411 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ROBERT M HESSIAN 411 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 411 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 EVERETT L FERRIAN 318 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 318 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 MAX MANA LEUTBOUNSHU 323 WASHINGTON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 323 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ERIC PAYNE 312 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 312 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 HAMID AZADEGAN 17559 TOFT COVE EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 401 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 PAUL C MILLER/ANNA M MILLER 322 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 322 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 WENDY DONOVAN 19760 COUNTY RD E ROGERS MN 55374 401 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 TRACEY ZAVADIL 319 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 319 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRIDGET HERMAN 320 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 320 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ALEXANDER SCOTT CHRISTENSEN 407 WASHINGTON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 407 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARY JANE MARTENIS 406 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 406 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 CLAYTON A/JANET M REMINGTON 308 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 308 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JEAN A FERGUSON 7169 CROWNE OAK RD EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 320 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 TAMMY J MAHONY 405 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 405 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 LEO R GLUECKSTEIN 402 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 402 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 HUGH M REICHERT 5817 ABBOTT AVE S EDINA MN 55410 423 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 DANIEL G & JACALYN R LARSON 318 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 318 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 THOMAS P & CAROL R DEICK 424 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 424 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 THOMAS BARRETT PATIN 517 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 517 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 MATTHEW W BEVINS 401 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 401 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JAMES E NORDSTROM 418 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 418 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 THOMAS J WENDEL 302 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 302 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARK W ADOLPHSON 319 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 319 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 HERMAN B ARNDT 308 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 308 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 TANNER HOLMQUIST 319 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 319 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 STEPHEN THOMPSON 422 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 422 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ROBERT KNAUER 406 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 406 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARK HARRIS 407 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 407 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 LAUREL M CORGARD 419 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 419 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 Page 903 of 1086 STEVEN V HOLWEGER 322 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 322 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MICHAEL B LARKIN 424 VAN BUREN AVE S HOPKINS MN 55343 424 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 ANNE C DAVIDSON 411 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 411 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 GERALD HOUSH 400 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 400 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 TWO GUYS ENTERPRISE LLC 4821 ALDRICH AVE S MINNEAPOLIS MN 55419 307 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MICHELLE R BRAUN 411 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 411 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 WILLIAM S STEINKE 508 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 508 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 WATERSTONE INVESTMENTS INC 8445 CENTER DRIVE FRIDLEY MN 55432 417 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ELI D LIBSON 409 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 409 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 RYAN H NELSON 411 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 411 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 JEFFREY L DONAT 314 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 314 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 M MEADE & K LAFOND 401 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 401 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 DILLON THOMAS CONNELL 400 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 400 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 TUAN QUOC NGO 312 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 312 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DAVID CLEARY 6615 BELMORE LA EDINA MN 55343 6615 BELMORE LN EDINA MN 55343 JOHN WOLF 415 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 415 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 JONATHAN B SMART 408 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 408 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 IZAAK ELLIOTT 313 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 313 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 JOHN MARK EIFERT 323 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 323 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 DAVID POBOISK 305 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 305 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 RICHARD D & WENDY L F SNOW 412 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 412 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 PATRICIA J SUNDBERG 312 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 312 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRIAN CHRISTOPHER BAKER 317 MADISON AVE S HOPKINS MN 55343 317 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARK F & RHONDA A KROLAK 404 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 404 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 NATHAN KUBIK & ANNE ROLLINS 321 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 321 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 KEVIN BENNETT 6601 BELMORE LA EDINA MN 55343 6601 BELMORE LN EDINA MN 55343 GAYLE R HANSON 323 JEFFERSON AVE SO EDINA MN 55343 323 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DOUGLAS A FREEMAN 2920 PILGRIM LN N PLYMOUTH MN 55441 6651 2ND ST EDINA MN 55343 ROBERT H HENNEN 318 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 318 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MICHAEL A LACK 5827 LOUIS AVE MINNETONKA MN 55345 403 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 KAL KOUATLI 207 CALLE FELICIDAD SAN CLEMENTE CA 92672 425 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 YAS BAKSHIAN 423 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 423 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MATTHEW D & LORI S LILLY 419 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 419 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 ALLYSON A KING 414 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 414 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JASON WALDEN & MARNIE WALDEN 306 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 306 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 MICHAEL D LANG 424 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 424 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DIANA JANE DRAAYER 423 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 423 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 JOHN PAUL NIGHTINGALE 306 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 306 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 CHANCIE HANSON 404 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 404 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 CAROLYN TAYLOR PETERSON 405 WASHINGTON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 405 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 GRACE GALLAGHER 413 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 413 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 JAMES & JOAN BLACKMAN 313 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 313 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 NICHOLAS R MONTGOMERY 416 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 416 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 GAGE D MEINERS 315 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 315 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 Page 904 of 1086 RJM PROPERTIES LLC 6274 GINGER DR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55346 410 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 COURTNEY K HAYES 409 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 409 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 WADE W LARKIN JR 423 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 423 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 JOSEPH L PALMERSHEIM 310 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 310 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 CARYL JONA FLORES 304 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 304 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 YVONNE R CHRISTIANSEN 420 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 420 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 HANAN Z SABRI 318 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 318 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 WAYNE K WONG 298 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 298 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 STEVEN JOHN OLSON 419 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 419 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 MARISSA THILL 321 WASHINGTON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 321 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JOHN NICHOLAS MORTON 302 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 302 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 WADE C FALK 316 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 316 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 KATHERYN M ZACHARY 413 WASHINGTON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 413 WASHINGTON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JANE OPOIEN 304 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 304 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DORIS LAMOUREUX P O BOX 1434 GRAND MARAIS MN 55604 300 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JEFFREY W PETERSON 301 HARISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 301 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 SYDNEY SANFORD 409 JEFFERSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 409 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 PRESTON JASPER 406 HARRISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 406 HARRISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 JANET KITUI 301 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 301 ADAMS AVE EDINA MN 55343 KRISTA L SAUERER 311 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 311 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 JULI MANZ & EUGENE MANZ 408 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 408 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 DANIEL COLESTOCK 419 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 419 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 ANTHONY R HERRLEY 313 JEFFERSON AVE S HOPKINS MN 55343 313 JEFFERSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 PETER M HUCH 512 TYLER CRT EDINA MN 55343 512 TYLER CT EDINA MN 55343 SARAH L REED 419 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 419 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 SHARON SCHAFFHAUSEN 303 MADISON AVE S HOPKINS MN 55343 303 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 PETRA SCHOLEN 414 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 414 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 KATHRYN C SPOERRI 424 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 424 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 BRUCE E & JANE M BRABEC 407 MADISON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 407 MADISON AVE EDINA MN 55343 STEPHANIE PAYNE 419 TYLER AVE S EDINA MN 55343 419 TYLER AVE EDINA MN 55343 PATRICK J A COOL 425 JACKSON AVE S EDINA MN 55343 425 JACKSON AVE EDINA MN 55343 KELLY M BOTTENBERG 416 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 416 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 CORY FRAUTSCHI 407 MONROE AVE S EDINA MN 55343 407 MONROE AVE EDINA MN 55343 LEAH M BYRD 418 VAN BUREN AVE S EDINA MN 55343 418 VAN BUREN AVE EDINA MN 55343 Page 905 of 1086 November 21, 2024 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-466 and A-293 PRESIDENTS A & B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY AND ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION The Edina City Council will meet at Edina City Hall on Monday, Dec. 9, 2024, at 6:00 p.m., to consider the public hearing on roadway and alley improvements for Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway and Alley Reconstruction. 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 the summer of 2025 with the assessment hearing occurring in the fall of 2026. The estimated roadway cost is $2,524,960.00 and is funded by special assessment. The estimated roadway cost per assessable lot is $8,600.00 per residential equivalent unit. The estimated alley cost is $11,700.00 and is funded by special assessment. The estimated alley cost per assessable lot is $1,300.00 per residential equivalent unit. The assessment can be divided over a fifteen-year period with interest accumulating on the unpaid balance. The area proposed to be assessed the cost of the proposed roadway improvement includes the following: 6651 and 6655 2nd Street South, 300 to 425 Adams Avenue, 6528 to 6750 Belmore Lane, 300 to 425 Harrison Avenue South, 400 to 425 Jackson Avenue South, 300 to 425 Jefferson Avenue South, 300 to 425 Madison Avenue South, 6940 Maloney Avenue, 299 to 425 Monroe Avenue South, 401 to 424 Tyler Avenue South, 500 to 520 Tyler Court, 298 to 425 Van Buren Avenue South, 301 to 423 Washington Avenue South, and PID 3011721210005. The area proposed to be assessed by the proposed alley improvements includes all properties between and including 400, 404, 406 and 408 Adams Avenue, and 401 to 409 Washington Avenue. 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. The City Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close of the hearing. Staff’s recommendations to City Council are: • Belmore Lane and Washington Avenue reconstructed to 24’ wide, including one-sided parking, and an 8’ shared- use path on the north and east sides, respectively • Monroe Avenue reconstructed to 24’ wide, including one-sided parking, and a 5’ concrete on the east side • 3rd Street reconstructed to 24’ wide with one sided parking; all other streets reconstructed to 27-feet wide • New concrete curb and gutter and new asphalt pavement on all streets • Storm sewer improvements to resolve local drainages issues and installation of sump drains where feasible • Full replacement of underground watermain, water services, hydrants and valves • Spot repairs and structural lining of the sanitary sewer main • New bituminous pavement on Adams Avenue gravel alley and Madison and Jefferson Avenues paved alley The Engineering Study will be available online as part of the Dec. 9 City Council meeting agenda at https://edinamn.portal.civicclerk.com; under Event Categories select City Council Meeting, click Search and you will see the Dec. 9 Agenda. Page 906 of 1086 «Tax_name» «Tax_add_l1» «Tax_add_l2» Page 907 of 1086 Notice of Public Hearing 2025 Presidents A & B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction November 21, 2024 English: This and other public hearing notices can be viewed online at EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Español: Este y otros avisos de audiencia pública se pueden ver en línea en EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Soomaali: Tan iyo ogeysiisyo kale oo dhagaysi dadweyne ayaa lagu daawan karaa onlayn ahaan EdinaMN.gov/PublicNotices. Further Information: City of Edina Engineering, 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 952-826-0371 Provide Input to Engineering Staff 1 – Post questions online at https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/presidents-ab for review by Engineering staff 2 – Write to City of Edina, Attention Engineering, 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina, MN 55439 Provide Public Input Share your thoughts! Public input can be provided in a variety of methods to City Council. All comments are reviewed and considered; therefore, you do not need to participate in more than one method. Public Input Options: 1 – Provide public input online at https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/public-hearings. (Available now) 2 – Leave a voicemail with your public input at 952-826-0377. Staff will submit the transcribed voicemail to Better Together Edina. (Available now) 3 – A public hearing will take place in the City Hall Council Chambers, 4801 W. 50th St., 6 p.m. Monday, December 9, 2024. Attend the meeting in person or watch the meeting live from home on cable channels 813 or 16 or stream live on YouTube.com/EdinaTV, or EdinaMN.gov/Meetings. Call in to provide live testimony at 312-535-8110 the night of the meeting and enter access code 2630 006 7693, password is 5454. City Council will make a decision at its meeting 7 p.m. Tuesday, Dec. 17. Page 908 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov2025 Street ReconstructionPublic HearingsPublic Improvement HearingDecember 9, 2024Page 909 of 1086 Agenda•Thank You – Residents, Council, and Staff•Infrastructure Replacement•Multimodal Information Sharing•Presidents A & BBlake Road Fall 2023Page 910 of 1086 Infrastructure Spending•Budget Work Plan – Pillar #1 Strong Foundation•Infrastructure meets community needs now and in the future•Multi-Modal Transportation Network – Roads, Sidewalks, Bicycle Facilities, Mass Transit•Clean & Safe Drinking Water –Water Treatment Plants, Distribution Networks.•Sanitation – Sanitary Sewer, Wastewater•Flood Protection - Storm Sewer, Lakes, PondsPage 911 of 1086 Pavement Condition Index - CitywidePage 912 of 1086 Pavement Condition Indexhttps://www.hillsboroughcounty.org/Page 913 of 1086 Page 914 of 1086 Page 915 of 1086 Build-outInfrastructure DividendsCommitment to ReinvestMaintenance GenerationPage 916 of 1086 2025 Project Area•Presidents A/B•Local Streets•301 PropertiesPage 917 of 1086 Why My Street?•Streets grouped into neighborhoods•Maximizes economics of scale•Extends pavement life•Proactive Pavement Management Program•Prioritized based on;•Pavement condition•Underground utility information•Bike and ped system needs & gapsPage 918 of 1086 Strategic Guidance•Comprehensive Plan•Race and Equity Plan•Climate Action Plan•Living Streets Plan•Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan•Active Routes to School PlanApproved PlansBudget PillarsPage 919 of 1086 Guiding ObjectivesMeet the needs of all users and abilitiesProvide connectivity for everyday usesImprove safety and comfortEncourage alternative transportationPage 920 of 1086 Proposed ImprovementsMeet the needs of all users and abilitiesProvide connectivity for everyday usesImprove safety and comfortEncourage alternative transportationPage 921 of 1086 EdinaMN.govPresidents A and BNeighborhood Roadway ReconstructionBA-466 and A-293Public Improvement Hearing December 9, 2024Page 922 of 1086 Project Details – Presidents A and B•301 properties (293.6 REUs) •2.75 miles of road •35,250 square yards of street pavement•2ndStreet, Maloney Avenue are not includedPage 923 of 1086 Proposed Watermain Improvements•Replace watermain and water services project wide•Replace hydrants and gate valves project wide•Verify appropriate hydrant spacing and add hydrants if needed to meet public safety standards•Paid for under watermain fundPage 924 of 1086 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Improvements•Spot trunk pipe repairs and cured-in-place pipe liners to reduce I&I•Replace manhole castings and rings•Paid for from sanitary sewer fundPage 925 of 1086 Proposed Storm Sewer Improvements•Modifications to roadway and storm sewer to improve existing drainage issues•Replace curb and gutter•Install sump drain pipe where feasible•Paid for by the storm sewer fundPage 926 of 1086 Existing Roadways Conditions•Roadway originally constructed with gravel in the 1950’s, followed by utilities and paving in the 1960’s•Existing street widths 30’ wide•Primarily clay soils with some silty sandy soilPage 927 of 1086 Existing Roadways Conditions•City of Edina Network Average Pavement Condition Index – 78•Presidents A/B – 26Page 928 of 1086 Existing Alley Conditions•230 feet of gravel alley between Washington and Adams Avenues•580 feet of asphalt alley between Jefferson and Madison Avenues•Concerns about required maintenance (snow plowing operations)Page 929 of 1086 Proposed Alley Improvements•New 10’ wide asphalt pavement on existing gravel alley between Washington and Adams Avenues•Reconstruct alley with new asphalt pavement between Jefferson and Madison AvenuesPage 930 of 1086 Right-of-Way Impacts•Irrigation systems and pet fences•Sod Restoration•Landscaping•Outwalks/steps•Retaining wallsPage 931 of 1086 Non-Standard Driveways•Approximately 20 instancesPage 932 of 1086 Proposed Roadway Improvements•Street widths will vary throughout the project area- Majority 27’ wide- Majority no parking changes•ExceptionsPage 933 of 1086 Existing: 30’ road width, two-sided parkingProposed: 27’ road width, two-sided parkingLocal Streets•Reduce street widths by 3’•Two-sided parking to remain•No multi-modal facilitiesPage 934 of 1086 Proposed: 24’ road width, one-sided parking, Ex. 10’ shared use path (0’ grass boulevard)Existing: 30’ road width, two-sided parkingNorth side South sideSouth sideNorth side3rdStreet•Reduce street width by 6’•One-side parking (south side)•Existing 10’ shared-use path to remainPage 935 of 1086 Existing Multi-Modal FacilitiesSUP on 2ndStSUP on 3rdStSidewalk on Maloney AveSUP in Alden ParkSUP to Blake RdPage 936 of 1086 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master PlanPedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan:•Sidewalk on Monroe Ave•Sidewalk and bike lanes on Washington Ave•Limited ROW•Impact to on-street parking•No connection to Alden ParkHopkins Ped/Bike Master Plan:•Bike boulevard on 3rd and 2nd St•Hopkins no longer supports these types of facilities•Off-street facility (SUP) already existsPage 937 of 1086 Proposed Multi-Modal Facilities•Seeking to balance strategic goals, resident feedback and construction impacts•Sidewalk on Monroe Ave (east side)•PBMP recommendation•Shared-use path on Washington Ave (east side)•Based on PBMP recommendation•Shared-use path on Belmore Ln (north side)•Not in PBMPPage 938 of 1086 Proposed Multi-Modal FacilitiesConnect to existing/proposed facilities on 2ndStreet, 3rdStreet, Monroe Avenue, and Maloney Avenue and Lincoln DriveAlden Park, Harley Hopkins Park and Van Valkenburg ParkHarley Hopkins Family Center and Blake School Downtown HopkinsMetro Transit Route 612 and Metro Transit Green Line ExtensionPage 939 of 1086 Proposed: 24’ road width, one-sided parking, 5’ sidewalk (3-5’ grass boulevard)Existing: 30’ road width, two-sided parkingEast sideWest sideEast sideWest sideMonroe Avenue•Reduce street width by 6’•One-sided parking (east side) •New 5’ sidewalk (east side)•Maloney Ave to 2ndSt•Sidewalk to be maintained by adjacent property ownersPage 940 of 1086 Proposed: 24’ road width, one-sided parking, 8’ shared use path (0-3’ grass boulevard)Existing: 30’ road width, two-sided parkingSouth sideNorth sideSouth sideNorth sideBelmore Lane•Reduce street width by 6’•One-side parking (north side)•New 8’ shared-use path (north side)•Washington Ave to Dearborn Ct•Shared-use path to be maintained by City adjacent to Alden park•Maintained by adjacent property owners otherwisePage 941 of 1086 Existing: 30’ road width, one-sided parkingWest side East sideProposed: 24’ road width, one-sided parking, 8’ shared use path (0-3’ grass boulevard)West sideEast sideWashington Avenue•Reduce street width by 6’•One-sided parking to remain•New 8’ shared-use path (east side)•Maloney Ave to 3rdSt•Shared-use path to be maintained by adjacent property ownersPage 942 of 1086 Transportation Commission Review•Support proposed facilities on Belmore Ln and Monroe Ave•Recommend separated pedestrianand bicycle facilities on Washington Ave (consistent with PBMP)•Would require removing on-street parking•Asked about consideration for new street treesETC Recommendation: On-street bike lanes, sidewalk, no parkingProposed:Shared use path, one-sided parkingPage 943 of 1086 Transportation Commission Advisory Communication•Strongly advocates for separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities in street reconstruction projects, per PBMP•Past decisions have favored SUPs due to cost and snow removal concerns•Residents and Council have expressed safety and aesthetic concerns about these paths, often leading to sidewalk-only options or complete removal•Clear guidance is needed to determine when SUPs are used over separated ped/bike facilitiesPage 944 of 1086 •ETC provided input on 2024 Concord B/C that was ultimately overridden•Struggle to balance City’s plans, Council input, resident input, and Commission’s input•AC is specific to this project (Washington Ave) and also seeks long-term clarity on City and Council’s interest in bike/ped infrastructure:•Are separated and protected bike lanes realistic in Edina?•Is there any openness to trade-offs between ped/bike infrastructure and snow removal?•Is there willingness to limit parking to improve ped/bike infrastructure?•Is there still a commitment to build the infrastructure in the 2018 PBMP?Transportation Commission Advisory CommunicationPage 945 of 1086 Estimated Project Costs*Includes concrete curb and gutter•Engineering, clerical, finance costs and contingency includedFunding SourceTotal CostAmountItemSpecial Assessments$2,524,960 Roadway – City of EdinaSpecial Assessments$11,700 Gravel Alley Property Taxes$2,169,000Roadway and Alley Hopkins$123,800Roadway – City of Hopkins$4,829,460 Roadway Total:$1,143,900 Sanitary Sewer$4,667,900 Watermain$6,726,100 Storm Sewer *City Utility Funds$12,537,900 Utility Total:PACS Fund$250,200 Sidewalk Total:$17,617,560 Project Total:Page 946 of 1086 Special Assessments•Assigned to benefitting properties of public improvements•2021 Policy Change •Transition to taxes over 16 year•Covers 57.86% of roadway costs% of Local Roadway Costs Assessed Construction Year100%202078.90%-68.37%2021-202363.12%202457.86%202552.6%-5.26%2026-20350%2036Page 947 of 1086 Special Assessments•Covers 57.86% of roadway costs•Roadway and driveway removals•Asphalt pavement•Restoration•Indirect Costs – engineering, finance, soil investigations, mailings•Remainder of roadway costs are covered by property taxesPage 948 of 1086 Residential Equivalent Units•Assessments distributed based on REUs•Factor used to compare properties to a single-family residence•Additional factors for commercial, industrial, and public-use propertiesREU FactorLand Use ClassScenario1.0Single-Family ResidentialA0.8Multi-Family Residential – DuplexBPage 949 of 1086 Estimated Roadway Assessments•301 properties (293.6 REUs)- 1 REU per single-family home- 0.5 REU for corner properties•$2,524,960 / 293.6 REUs = $8,600 per REU- ($22,900 without policy change)Page 950 of 1086 Estimated Gravel Alley Assessments•9 properties (9 REUs)•$11,700 / 9 REUs = $1,300 per REU•Paved alley previously assessed in 20070 REUsPage 951 of 1086 44•Special assessments are valid if; •The assessment does not exceed the special benefit measured by the increase in market value due to the improvement.•Licensed and Qualified Appraisal FirmMarket Benefit EstimatePage 952 of 1086 •Properties could see an average price benefit of: -Roadway…$9,000 to $12,000 per buildable lot-Alley…$3,000 to $4,000 per buildable lot•Preliminary Assessment-Roadway…$8,600-Alley…$1,300Market Benefit EstimatePage 953 of 1086 Assessment Payment Options•Final assessment amount will be sent one year after project completion (Fall 2026)•Pay entire amount upon receiving bill to avoid future interest charges•Pay min. 25%; balance rolls to property taxes over 15 years•Roll entire amount to property taxes over 15 years•2024 interest rate was 4.69%•Defer payment if 65 years of age or older and meet specific income requirementsPage 954 of 1086 Project ScheduleDateMilestoneSeptember 2022, October 2023Neighborhood Informational Video PresentationSeptember 24, 2024Neighborhood Informational Open HouseOctober 24, 2024ETC Engineering Study ReviewDecember 9, 2024Public Hearing Opens / Receive Engineering StudyDecember 11, 2024Public Hearing ClosesDecember 17, 2024Public Hearing DecisionMarch/April 2025Bid OpeningSpring 2025Award Contract / Begin ConstructionFall 2025Complete ConstructionOctober 2026Final Assessment HearingPage 955 of 1086 Recommendation•Reminder -Approving Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements requires a minimum of 3 out of 5 Council votes in favor to pass •Staff believes this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure•Motion to close the public hearing at noon, December 11,and to continue action on the item to the December 17 City Council meeting. (Improvement Nos. BA-466 and A-293)Page 956 of 1086 Thank you for your time!Page 957 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 9.5 Prepared By: Scott Neal, City Manager Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Finance Item Title: American Rescue Plan Act Spending Plan Update Action Requested: Adopt an updated spending plan to transfer about $300K to the City’s general fund as previously recommended in the Phase 1 spending plan. Information/Background: The City of Edina received $4.9 million in federal funds through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). For reporting purposes, the City opted to utilize the standard allowance related to public sector revenue loss which allows the funds to be used for the provision of government services. The City Council approved a Phase 1 spending plan for $2.6 million of these funds on July 21, 2021. These funds were dedicated to projects within the following areas: Community Aid, Public Health, Economic Development, Infrastructure, and Housing. The Phase I plan did not include any spending on government operations. The Phase II spending plan was approved by the City Council on December 6, 2022. These funds were primarily dedicated to government operations ($1.2M) and infrastructure ($700K). A list of specific projects with corresponding amounts of funds awarded/spent is attached as Exhibit A. This list shows that there is about $300K that is unobligated as of today’s date. Federal regulations require that ARPA funds may only be used to cover costs incurred or obligated by December 31, 2024. As the Phase II spending plan stated, Edina’s Phase I spending plan was focused on external community projects verses internal like several peer cities who spent 100% of their ARPA money on government operations. In accordance with Federal Regulations, recipients may use funds up to the amount of revenue loss for government services. This includes payroll and covered benefits expenses for public safety, public health, health care, human services, and similar employees. Resources/Financial Impacts: Federal American Rescue Plan Funding Relationship to City Policies: Supporting Documentation: 1. Exhibit A Page 958 of 1086 Exhibit A Amount Amount ARPA SPENDING PLAN Allocated Spent Obligated Remaining ARPA sub: Heal Together 142,000$ 142,000$ -$ -$ ARPA sub: Mental Health Unit 258,000 190,594 67,406 - ARPA sub: VEAP Food 33,393 33,393 - - ARPA sub: VEAP Rent 466,607 466,607 - - ARPA sub: 50th & France 100,000 100,000 - - ARPA sub: Edina Chamber 250,000 250,000 - - General Small Business Support 200,000 179,420 20,580 - Small Business Targeted Support 149,000 149,000 - - ARPA sub: 2021 Broadband Community 100,000 26,604 73,396 - ARPA sub: 2021 Broadband City 300,000 300,000 - - ARPA sub: 1000 Trees 250,000 234,126 - 15,874 ARPA sub: Community Health SW 300,000 300,000 - - ARPA sub: Cap Investments response 522,930 316,968 205,962 - ARPA sub: Edina Ed Fund LETRS 300,000 300,000 - - Comm Surveillance Camera Network 300,000 216,226 83,774 - Affordable Housing Finance Program 80,000 33,759 - 46,241 Government Ops Training & Support 1,100,000 403,850 460,450 235,700 Edina Give & Go 20,000 20,000 - - 4,871,930$ 3,662,548$ 911,568$ 297,814$ Page 959 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 9.6 Prepared By: Pa Thao, Finance Director Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Finance Item Title: Resolution No. 2024-110: Setting 2025 Tax Levy and Adopting Operating Budget, Approve 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Plan Action Requested: Two actions are requested: 1. Approve Resolution No. 2024-110, setting the 2025 Tax Levy and Adopting 2025 Operating Budget, which is required at the December 17 2024, meeting. 2. Approve the 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Plan Information/Background: The City began developing the 2024-2025 budget early in 2023. The budget priority from the community and council were to invest in public safety and the attached budget is a result of those priorities. On December 19, 2023, the Council adopted the 2024-2025 budget. The two-year budget cycle allows for focused discussions on the City's general operating budgets in odd-numbered years and on capital spending and investments in even-numbered years. On September 17, 2024, the City Council reviewed the proposed 2025 budget and adopted the preliminary levy for taxes payable in 2025. Initially, the proposed levy increase for 2025 was $7,148,589, representing a 13.14% increase from the 2024 levy. Staff recommends maintaining the 13.14% increase to ensure the City meets its funding priorities and operational needs. Following a reevaluation, we are presenting the following options as a least harm approach to balancing priorities: 1. Funding $250,000 from cash reserves for a zoning amendment. 2. Funding $300,000 from cash reserves for the design of a cold storage building, with potential reimbursement when bonding for the full project. 3. Revising equipment replacement plans to reduce costs by $112,000 (New – proposal 12/17/24, details below). The new addition of revisions of the equipment replacement plans is the result of requests made by City Council at the December 3rd Council Meeting. Staff would be removing a $25,000 safety related improvement to Centennial Lakes (Staff has the funds in 2024 and will move forward with correcting this issue earlier). Staff also is proposing to move two equipment replacement items (Mobile Pro Defender Camera System and Mobile Air Cart Response) and to fund them alternatively with public safety funding, totalling $87,000. If all these adjustments are implemented, the revised levy increase for 2025 would be $6,486,589, or 11.92%, compared to the 2024 levy. These recommendations aim to address immediate funding needs Page 960 of 1086 while minimizing long-term impacts on City services and operations. The City Council reviewed the 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) during the August 20, 2024, September 17, 2024, and December 3, 2024, work sessions. This packet includes a detailed list of projects funded in the 2025-2030 CIP by funding source. Staff recommends the Council take action tonight to approve the final levy as outlined in the attached resolution. While there is no statutory deadline for CIP approval, staff recommends adopting the CIP on December 17, 2024. Resources/Financial Impacts: This is essential for the funding of the City's operation and capital projects. Relationship to City Policies: This is essential for our Capital Improvement Plan, Operating Budget and City Work Plans Supporting Documentation: 1. Resolution No. 2024-110: Adopting the Final Budget and Levy for 2025 2. 2025 Budget Reports 3. 2025-2030 CIP Projects by Funding Source 4. Hennepin County Tax Levy Certification Forms 5. Staff Presentation Page 961 of 1086 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-110 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF EDINA FOR YEAR 2025, AND ESTABLISHING THE PROPOSED TAX LEVY PAYABLE IN 2025 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Budgets for all Governmental Funds as shown on Attachment A for the City of Edina for the calendar year 2025 is hereby adopted and funds are hereby appropriated; Section 2. The Budgets for all Enterprise Funds as shown on Attachment B for the City of Edina for the calendar year 2025 is hereby adopted and funds are hereby appropriated; Section 3. That there will be levied upon all taxable real and personal property in the City of Edina, a tax rate sufficient to produce the amount as follows: FOR GENERAL FUND $48,858,215 FOR CONSTRUCTION FUND $7,072,000 LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF CIP PLAN BONDS – SERIES 2016A (Fire) $406,000 LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF CIP PLAN BONDS – SERIES 2021B (PW) $1,512,000 LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF CIP PLAN BONDS – SERIES 2024A (Fire) $1,133,449 LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF CIP PLAN BONDS – SERIES 2024B (Fire) $763,090 LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF HRA PUBLIC PROJECT BONDS – SERIES 2014 (Dome) $1,165,100 LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF HRA PUBLIC PROJECT BONDS – SERIES 2015A (Gym) $398,000 TOTAL TAX CAPACITY LEVY $61,307,854 Section 4. That the final 2025 budget for the City of Edina is as follows: TOTAL REVENUES – GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS $96,932,890 TOTAL EXPENDITURES – GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS $118,001,356 TOTAL REVENUES – ENTERPRISE FUNDS $62,185,054 TOTAL EXPENDITURES – ENTERPRISE FUNDS $66,605,411 TOTAL REVENUES – INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS $ 10,749,823 TOTAL EXPENDITURES – INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS $ 9,385,781 Section 5. That the final 2025 budget and tax levy incorporates revisions to the scheduled levy for the Series 2019A General Obligation Bonds (Fire Equipment) due to sufficient funds available to pay the required debt service. Approved this 17th day of December 2024. Attest: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2024, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. Page 962 of 1086 WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ______ day of __________, 20___. _______________________________ City Clerk Page 963 of 1086 Budget Budget 2024 2025 General Fund Levies General Operating Levy 43,744,165$ 48,858,215$ General Fund Subtotal 43,744,165 48,858,215 Increase From Prior Year (%)9.85%11.69% Debt Service Fund Levies Gymnasium Debt Service 392,000 398,000 Fire Station Debt Service 403,000 406,000 Public Works Facility Debt Service 1,508,000 1,512,000 Sports Dome 1,168,700 1,165,100 Fire Station 2 Debt Service*- 1,896,539 Debt Service Fund Subtotal 3,471,700 5,377,639 Increase From Prior Year (%)7.48%54.90% Construction Fund Levies Capital Improvement Plan Levy 2,000,000 1,900,000 Equipment Levy 2,470,000 3,010,000 Street Reconstruction Levy 1,481,000 1,762,000 Special Park Improvement Levy 1,000,000 400,000 Construction Fund Subtotal 6,951,000 7,072,000 Increase From Prior Year (%)5.95%1.74% HRA Fund Levies HRA Operating Levy 251,700 259,300 HRA Fund Subtotal 251,700 259,300 Increase From Prior Year (%)2.99%3.02% Total Property Tax Levy 54,418,565$ 61,567,154$ Increase From Prior Year (%)9.15%13.14% PROPOSED TAX LEVIES 1 Page 964 of 1086 Opioid Braemar Arts &Debt General HRA PACS Response CAS CDBG Police SR Memorial Culture Service Construction Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN Property Tax Levy 48,858,215$ 259,300$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 5,377,639$ 7,072,000$ 61,567,154$ Tax Increments - 2,415,000 - - - - - - - - - 2,415,000 Local Option Sales Tax - - - - - - - - - - 5,436,000 5,436,000 Franchise Fees & Other Taxes 1,120,000 - 1,230,000 - 980,000 - - - - - 80,000 3,410,000 Special Assessments - - - - - - - - - - 3,723,637 3,723,637 Licenses & Permits 5,819,338 - - - - - - - - - - 5,819,338 Intergovernmental 2,667,960 - - 34,622 - 170,000 - - - - - 2,872,582 Charges for Services 6,315,176 800,000 - - - - - - - - - 7,115,176 Fines and Forfeitures 350,000 - - - - - - - - - - 350,000 Investment Income 425,000 304,000 22,000 2,000 46,000 - 3,000 1,000 - - 382,000 1,185,000 Other Revenue 1,482,182 - - - 20,000 - 225,000 2,500 - - - 1,729,682 Transfers and Contributions 157,000 - - - - - - - - 2,948,861 - 3,105,861 TOTAL REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN 67,194,871 3,778,300 1,252,000 36,622 1,046,000 170,000 228,000 3,500 - 8,326,500 16,693,637 98,729,430 EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY TYPE Personnel Services 46,929,559 182,088 156,234 - 299,380 - - - - - 141,347 47,708,608 Contractual Services 11,023,260 8,069,640 80,440 34,622 298,440 170,000 137,500 1,000 - - - 19,814,902 Commodities 2,592,394 300 5,000 - 4,000 - 10,000 - - - - 2,611,694 Internal Services 6,299,658 - 10,349 - 22,646 - - - - - 3,066 6,335,719 Capital Outlay - 2,550,000 518,500 - 600,000 - - - - - 20,699,104 24,367,604 Debt Service - - - - - - - - - 25,012,343 - 25,012,343 Transfers and Contributions 350,000 - - - - - - - - - 2,948,861 3,298,861 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT 67,194,871 10,802,028 770,523 34,622 1,224,466 170,000 147,500 1,000 - 25,012,343 23,792,378 129,149,731 EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY DEPARTMENT Administration 3,226,108 - - - - - - - - - 275,000 3,501,108 Human Resources 1,883,661 - - - - - - - - - - 1,883,661 Finance 2,252,557 - - - - - - - - - - 2,252,557 Public Works 7,269,800 - - - - - - - - - 991,000 8,260,800 Engineering 5,081,958 - 770,523 - 1,224,466 - - - - - 8,847,928 15,924,875 Fire 15,661,531 - - 34,622 - - - - - - 3,077,250 18,773,403 Parks and Recreation 8,247,576 - - - - - - 1,000 - - 8,886,200 17,134,776 Police 18,866,704 - - - - - 147,500 - - - 970,000 19,984,204 Community Development 2,909,597 10,802,028 - - - 170,000 - - - - - 13,881,625 Information Technology - - - - - - - - - - 485,000 485,000 Communications 1,795,379 - - - - - - - - - 260,000 2,055,379 Debt Service - - - - - - - - - 25,012,343 - 25,012,343 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT 67,194,871 10,802,028 770,523 34,622 1,224,466 170,000 147,500 1,000 - 25,012,343 23,792,378 129,149,731 2025 GOVERNMENTAL FUND BUDGETS 2 Page 965 of 1086 Aquatic Golf Braemar Art Utilities Liquor Center Course Arena Field Center Edinborough Centennial Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN Operating Revenues 31,948,581$ 15,014,993$ 1,184,100$ 6,088,500$ 2,592,000$ 565,500$ 122,000$ 1,466,100$ 901,750$ 59,883,524$ Intergovernmental 90,000 - - - - - - - - 90,000 Investment Income 434,000 44,000 48,000 52,000 13,000 26,000 4,000 10,000 9,000 640,000 Other Revenues 5,000 - - - - - - - - 5,000 Transfers In - 5,180 17,000 61,050 400,000 1,300 300,000 18,000 764,000 1,566,530 TOTAL REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN 32,477,581 15,064,173 1,249,100 6,201,550 3,005,000 592,800 426,000 1,494,100 1,674,750 62,185,054 EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY TYPE Cost of Goods Sold - 10,969,768 78,500 226,000 125,000 - - 39,000 15,000 11,453,268 Personnel Services 3,758,646 2,818,776 721,841 2,713,287 1,523,587 203,080 352,114 1,287,383 1,003,417 14,382,131 Contractual Services 11,162,105 638,731 267,586 923,852 1,165,907 201,818 86,599 386,903 412,747 15,246,248 Commodities 1,381,150 58,500 143,900 498,050 156,500 19,200 29,000 206,750 155,895 2,648,945 Internal Services 1,642,183 459,007 52,536 457,202 275,494 37,410 53,639 180,095 147,321 3,304,887 Capital Outlay 15,692,180 220,000 290,000 197,341 - - - - - 16,399,521 Interest and Fiscal Charges 1,548,138 - 9,600 189,044 50,100 - - - - 1,796,881 Transfers and Contributions 373,530 1,000,000 - - - - - - - 1,373,530 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT 35,557,932 16,164,782 1,563,963 5,204,776 3,296,588 461,508 521,352 2,100,131 1,734,380 66,605,411 EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY DEPARTMENT Finance 800,119 - - - - - - - - 800,119 Public Works 32,047,319 - - - - - - - - 32,047,319 Engineering 903,914 - - - - - - - - 903,914 Fire 1,806,580 - - - - - - - - 1,806,580 Parks and Recreation - 16,164,782 1,563,963 5,204,776 3,296,588 461,508 521,352 2,100,131 1,734,380 31,047,480 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT 35,557,932 16,164,782 1,563,963 5,204,776 3,296,588 461,508 521,352 2,100,131 1,734,380 66,605,411 CHANGE IN NET POSITION (3,080,351)$ (1,100,609)$ (314,863)$ 996,774$ (291,588)$ 131,292$ (95,352)$ (606,031)$ (59,630)$ (4,420,357)$ 2025 ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS 3 Page 966 of 1086 Risk Equipment Information Facilities Management Operations Technology Management Fund Fund Fund Fund Total REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN Operational Revenues 4,264,313$ 2,331,113$ 2,626,322$ 1,528,075$ 10,749,823$ TOTAL REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN 4,264,313 2,331,113 2,626,322 1,528,075 10,749,823 EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY TYPE Personal Services 236,510 902,827 1,431,448 460,688 3,031,473 Contractual Services 2,313,273 257,700 1,422,720 868,715 4,862,408 Commodities 8,000 1,114,800 220,000 149,100 1,491,900 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT 2,557,783 2,275,327 3,074,168 1,478,503 9,385,781 EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY DEPARTMENT Human Resources 2,557,783 - - - 2,557,783 Public Works - 2,275,327 - - 2,275,327 Engineering - - - 1,478,503 1,478,503 Information Technology - - 3,074,168 - 3,074,168 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT 2,557,783 2,275,327 3,074,168 1,478,503 9,385,781 CHANGE IN NET POSITION 1,706,530$ 55,786$ (447,846)$ 49,572$ 1,364,042$ 2025 INTERNAL SERVICE FUND BUDGETS 4 Page 967 of 1086 Governmental Enterprise Internal Service Funds Funds Funds Total REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Property Tax Levy 61,567,154$ -$ -$ 61,567,154$ Tax Increments 2,415,000 - - 2,415,000 Local Option Sales Tax 5,436,000 - - 5,436,000 Franchise Fees & Other Taxes 3,410,000 585,900 - 3,995,900 Special Assessments 3,723,637 - - 3,723,637 Licenses & Permits 5,819,338 - - 5,819,338 Intergovernmental 2,872,582 90,000 - 2,962,582 Charges for Services 7,115,176 128,750 10,749,823 17,993,749 Fines and Forfeitures 350,000 - - 350,000 Investment Income 1,185,000 640,000 - 1,825,000 Other Revenue 1,729,682 3,206,300 - 4,935,982 Transfers and Contributions 3,105,861 1,566,530 - 4,672,391 Operating Revenue - 55,967,574 - 55,967,574 TOTAL REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 98,729,430 62,185,054 10,749,823 171,664,307 EXPENDITURES, EXPENSES AND OTHER FINANCING USES - BY TYPE Cost of Goods Sold - 11,453,268 - 11,453,268 Personnel Services 47,708,608 14,382,131 3,031,473 65,122,212 Contractual Services 19,814,902 15,246,248 4,862,408 39,923,558 Commodities 2,611,694 2,648,945 1,491,900 6,752,539 Internal Services 6,335,719 3,304,887 - 9,640,606 Capital Outlay 24,367,604 16,399,521 - 40,767,125 Debt Service 25,012,343 1,796,881 - 26,809,224 Transfers and Contributions 3,298,861 1,373,530 - 4,672,391 TOTAL EXPENDITURES, EXPENSES AND OTHER FINANCING USES 129,149,731 66,605,411 9,385,781 205,140,923 EXPENDITURES, EXPENSES AND OTHER FINANCING USES - BY FUNCTION Administration 3,501,108 - - 3,501,108 Human Resources 1,883,661 - 2,557,783 4,441,444 Finance 2,252,557 800,119 - 3,052,676 Public Works 8,260,800 32,047,319 2,275,327 42,583,446 Engineering 15,924,875 903,914 1,478,503 18,307,292 Fire 18,773,403 1,806,580 - 20,579,983 Parks and Recreation 17,134,776 31,047,480 - 48,182,256 Police 19,984,204 - - 19,984,204 Community Development 13,881,625 - - 13,881,625 Information Technology 485,000 - 3,074,168 3,559,168 Communications 2,055,379 - - 2,055,379 Debt Service 25,012,343 - - 25,012,343 TOTAL EXPENDITURES, EXPENSES AND OTHER FINANCING USES 129,149,731 66,605,411 9,385,781 205,140,923 CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE OR NET POSITION (30,420,301) (4,420,357) 1,364,042 (33,476,616) FUND BALANCE OR NET POSITION - JANUARY 1 90,036,836 127,571,406 5,616,866 223,225,108 FUND BALANCE OR NET POSITION - DECEMBER 31 59,616,535$ 123,151,049$ 6,980,908$ 189,748,492$ 2025 Budget 5 Page 968 of 1086 2022 2023 2024 2025 Actual Actual Budget Budget REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Property Tax Levy 45,096,245$ 49,156,932$ 54,418,565$ 10.70%61,567,154$ 13.14% Tax Increments 1,720,244 2,078,686 2,015,000 -3.06%2,415,000 19.85% Local Option Sales Tax - 5,450,871 5,436,000 -0.27%5,436,000 0.00% Franchise Fees & Other Taxes 3,661,134 3,694,430 3,995,900 8.16%3,995,900 0.00% Special Assessments 4,426,156 3,609,885 3,890,096 7.76%3,723,637 -4.28% Licenses & Permits 7,482,097 5,716,734 5,562,360 -2.70%5,819,338 4.62% Intergovernmental 6,673,178 8,117,356 3,181,828 -60.80%2,962,582 -6.89% Charges for Services 14,245,623 15,798,542 17,249,935 9.19%17,993,749 4.31% Fines and Forfeitures 359,680 488,872 350,000 -28.41%350,000 0.00% Operating Revenue 56,166,200 53,842,160 53,970,248 0.24%55,967,574 3.70% Investment Income (3,883,446) 7,467,598 1,776,000 -76.22%1,825,000 2.76% Other Revenue 8,575,955 3,977,165 5,911,850 48.64%4,935,982 -16.51% Transfers and Contributions 18,131,197 6,046,554 4,438,243 -26.60%4,672,391 5.28% Debt Issued 31,291,270 1,290,608 - -100.00%- N/A Other Financing Sources 145,686 362,697 - -100.00%- N/A TOTAL REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 194,091,217 167,099,090 162,196,026 -2.93%171,664,307 5.84% EXPENDITURES, EXPENSES AND OTHER FINANCING USES - BY TYPE Cost of Goods Sold 10,458,750 9,553,705 10,570,828 10.65%11,453,268 8.35% Personnel Service 49,620,892 54,196,885 60,155,231 10.99%65,122,212 8.26% Contractual Services 34,728,159 34,539,634 37,494,382 8.55%39,923,558 6.48% Commodities 6,183,923 5,596,220 6,639,838 18.65%6,752,539 1.70% Internal Services 7,978,288 8,190,952 9,507,757 16.08%9,640,606 1.40% Capital Outlay 29,527,500 26,544,647 51,103,297 92.52%40,767,125 -20.23% Depreciation 8,864,924 8,958,385 - -100.00%- N/A Debt Service 12,802,481 9,336,381 9,921,353 6.27%26,809,224 170.22% Other Revenue 11,801 - - N/A - N/A Transfers and Contributions 14,685,915 6,046,554 4,438,243 -26.60%4,672,391 5.28% TOTAL EXPENDITURES, EXPENSES AND OTHER FINANCING USES 174,862,632 162,963,364 189,830,930 16.49%205,140,923 8.07% EXPENDITURES, EXPENSES AND OTHER FINANCING USES - BY DEPARTMENT Administration 2,481,936 2,322,986 3,560,065 53.25%3,501,108 -1.66% Human Resources 3,856,650 4,202,179 4,561,005 8.54%4,441,444 -2.62% Finance 5,106,801 5,186,646 3,620,179 -30.20%3,052,676 -15.68% Public Works 27,155,679 29,211,382 51,376,325 75.88%42,583,446 -17.11% Engineering 16,641,967 26,775,353 25,649,511 -4.20%18,307,292 -28.63% Fire 29,207,398 17,234,249 17,092,318 -0.82%20,579,983 20.40% Parks and Recreation 36,067,820 38,043,870 42,309,354 11.21%48,182,256 13.88% Police 15,662,369 16,316,230 19,418,967 19.02%19,984,204 2.91% Community Development 23,562,515 12,179,316 9,391,866 -22.89%13,881,625 47.80% Information Technology 2,317,269 2,309,810 3,265,043 41.36%3,559,168 9.01% Communications 1,508,948 1,735,656 1,706,115 -1.70%2,055,379 20.47% Debt Service 11,293,281 7,445,703 7,880,182 5.84%25,012,343 217.41% TOTAL EXPENDITURES, EXPENSES AND OTHER FINANCING USES 174,862,632 162,963,379 189,830,930 16.49%205,140,923 8.07% CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE OR NET POSITION 19,228,585 4,135,726 (27,634,904) (33,476,616) FUND BALANCE OR NET POSITION - JANUARY 1 227,495,702 246,724,287 250,860,012 223,225,108 FUND BALANCE OR NET POSITION - DECEMBER 31 246,724,287$ 250,860,012$ 223,225,108$ 189,748,492$ CONSOLIDATED BUDGET 6 Page 969 of 1086 Draft - Capital Improvement Plan City of Edina, Minnesota PROJECTS BY FUNDING SOURCE 2025 2030thru Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority Braemar Field Fund P&R25125Braemar Field Turf & Shell Replacement 2,300,0002,300,000 P&R25126Braemar Field Heater 200,000200,000 P&R25127Braemar Field Stormwater Design 75,00075,000 Braemar Field Fund Total 2,575,00075,000 200,000 2,300,000 Bridge Maintenance ENG210616520 Belmore Lane Multi-Tiered Retaining Wall 400,000400,000 ENG250186932 Valley View Road Multi-Tiered Retaining Wall 360,000360,000 ENG25020Dewey Hill Road CP Rail Crossing 35,00035,000 Bridge Maintenance Total 795,000395,000 400,000 CAS Fund: Utility Franchise Fees ENG21040Electric Vehicle Infrastructure & Vehicle Upgrades 600,000100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 ENG21062Facility Efficiency Upgrades 3,000,000500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 ENG25001DC Fast Charger 150,000150,000 FAC25126Photovoltaic & EV Charger Installation 2,225,000575,000 50,000 500,000 1,100,000 FAC25127Fire Station #1 Energy Management Study 500,000500,000 PWK25104Public Works Fleet - Bio Diesel Storage Tanks 375,000375,000 CAS Fund: Utility Franchise Fees Total 6,850,0001,625,000 1,175,000 600,000 650,000 1,100,000 1,700,000 Construction Fund: Cable PEG COM23100Communications Equipment Replacement 70,00070,000 COM25100Replacement of Council Chambers Cameras 40,00040,000 COM25101Cable TV Broadcast Server Replacement 70,00070,000 COM25102Video Production Studio Space 350,000350,000 FAC25118Senior Center AV Equipment 55,00055,000 FAC25122City Hall Council Chambers Studio Lighting 300,000300,000 Construction Fund: Cable PEG Total 885,000355,000 140,000 350,000 40,000 Construction Fund: CIP Levy 15-048Normandale Park Shelter Building Replacement 1,040,00040,000 1,000,000 15-049Lewis Park Shelter Building Replacement 900,000900,000 ENG21000Asset Preservation Funding 4,300,000650,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 750,000 800,000 Page 970 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority ENG21044City Wide ADA Facility Improvements Level 2 300,00050,000 100,000 50,000 100,000 ENG21045City Wide ADA Facility Improvements Level 3&4 1,336,0001,336,000 ENG21051Pamela Park Facility Maintenance 210,000210,000 ENG25021Grandview Parking Ramp ADA Access Route 200,000200,000 ENG25022Grandview Parking Ramp ADA Access Route to Gus Yng 2,000,0002,000,000 FAC23109Arneson Acres Park Facility Improvements 700,000700,000 FAC25101City Wide Card Reader & Fire Alarm Updates 100,000100,000 FAC25108Fire Station #1 Living Quarters 500,000500,000 FAC25113Public Works Cold Storage Building Replacement 200,000200,000 FAC25114Public Works Space Reconfiguration 850,00075,000 775,000 FAC25115Public Works Access Gates 300,000300,000 FAC25117Public Works BAS & Lighting Upgrades 825,000125,000 700,000 FAC25125City Hall HVAC Equipment Replacement 500,000500,000 ITS25100CLP Maintenance Fiber 30,00030,000 ITS25101Increase Fiber Capacity to SLP 60,00060,000 P&R21006Athletic Field Improvements 1,050,000350,000 350,000 350,000 P&R21046Normandale Park Playground Equipment 200,000200,000 P&R21047Heights Park Playground Equipment 175,000175,000 P&R25102Highlands Park Shelter Replacement 1,250,0001,250,000 P&R25103Yorktown Park Master Plan 790,00040,000 750,000 P&R25104Chowen Park Playground Improvement 350,000350,000 P&R25105Countryside Playground Replacement 315,000315,000 P&R25106Park Pathways and Parking Project Improvements 525,00025,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 P&R25107Parks Accessibility Improvements 525,00025,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 P&R25108Utley Park Shelter Replacement 60,00060,000 P&R25110Arneson Park Shelter Replacement 75,00075,000 P&R25111Rosland Park Master Plan 100,000100,000 P&R25130Centennial Lakes Park Public Wi-Fi 40,00040,000 P&R25145Centennial Lakes Entrance Fountain Repair 150,000150,000 P&R25147Centennial Lakes Improvements 800,000800,000 PW22002Annual Deferred Retaining Wall Replacements 750,00050,000 100,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Construction Fund: CIP Levy Total 21,506,0001,900,000 2,205,000 2,995,000 3,990,000 5,116,000 5,300,000 Construction Fund: Equipment Levy 17-028Braemar Arena Zamboni 400,000200,000 200,000 17-039Centennial Lakes Vehicle Replacement 40,00040,000 ADM23200Administration Equipment Replacement 325,00030,000 85,000 210,000 COM23100Communications Equipment Replacement 40,00040,000 DEV23100Development Equipment Replacement 97,00097,000 ENG23200Engineering Equipment Replacement 631,331150,000 102,631 191,500 64,700 92,500 30,000 FAC25110Facility Asset Maintenance Software 1,044,000300,000 135,000 142,000 150,000 155,000 162,000 FIR23200Fire Equipment Replacement 6,567,292782,300 1,044,845 1,258,995 1,403,395 1,112,350 965,407 HR25100Centennial Lakes Garage Safety Equip Improvements 25,00025,000 Page 971 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority ITS23100IT Equipment Replacement 2,340,000440,000 95,000 633,000 500,000 294,000 378,000 P&R21001General Park Asset Equipment Replacement 250,00050,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 P&R23120Park Maintenance Equip Replacement - Vehicles 1,693,750329,300 411,700 234,250 223,500 191,000 304,000 POL23200Police Equipment Replacement 3,102,300380,000 358,000 867,800 588,000 690,000 218,500 POL25101Patrol Squad Car Addition 60,00060,000 PWK23200Public Works Equipment Replacement 4,214,107583,500 830,000 23,000 767,684 1,089,000 920,923 Construction Fund: Equipment Levy Total 20,829,7803,070,100 3,102,176 3,810,545 3,847,279 3,873,850 3,125,830 Construction Fund: Grants/Donations 19-301Wooddale Ave Bridge Historic Rehab 1,500,0001,500,000 ENG25001DC Fast Charger 150,000150,000 ENG25026Rosland Park Pedestrian Bridge 6,000,0006,000,000 P&R25126Braemar Field Heater 200,000200,000 Construction Fund: Grants/Donations Total 7,850,000150,000 7,700,000 Construction Fund: MSA 17-01169th Street Roundabout 450,000450,000 19-301Wooddale Ave Bridge Historic Rehab 400,000400,000 ENG21028Hilary Lane Reconstruction 3,387,9783,387,978 ENG21030West 76th Street A Reconstruction 968,276968,276 ENG23004Benton Avenue A Reconstruction 1,475,2971,475,297 ENG25002Parklawn Avenue A Reconstruction 524,385524,385 ENG25003W 77th Street D Reconstruction 987,078987,078 ENG25023Valley View Rd Fence Replace Sdale Neighborhood 100,000100,000 ENG25028Traffic Signal at Halifax and 50th St 400,000400,000 ENG2502950th over Minnehaha Creek North Retaining Wall 275,000275,000 ENG25030Benton Avenue Over CP Rail Beam Painting 250,000250,000 ENG25031Valley View Road Bridge over CP Rail Beam Painting 250,000250,000 Construction Fund: MSA Total 9,468,014400,000 500,000 3,662,978 2,929,739 1,975,297 Construction Fund: Special Assess 19-308Prospect Knolls C Reconstruction 1,091,2681,091,268 19-309Prospect Knolls D Reconstruction 332,125332,125 19-310Presidents B Reconstruction 1,129,5461,129,546 19-314Indian Trails A Reconstruction 671,785671,785 ENG21021Presidents A Reconstruction 1,946,4511,946,451 ENG21023Parklawn (Parklawn Ct) Reconstruction 265,583265,583 ENG21024Rolling Green Reconstruction 2,505,0502,505,050 ENG21025Minnehaha Woods D Reconstruction 456,609456,609 ENG21026South Cornelia B Reconstruction 3,447,2973,447,297 ENG21027South Cornelia D Reconstruction 3,182,3943,182,394 ENG21028Hilary Lane Reconstruction 302,453302,453 ENG21030West 76th Street A Reconstruction 200,919200,919 Page 972 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority ENG23001Prospect Knolls A Reconstruction 1,632,1581,632,158 ENG23002Countryside E Reconstruction 782,328782,328 ENG23003Todd Park B Reconstruction 523,709523,709 ENG23004Benton Avenue A Reconstruction 108,997108,997 ENG25002Parklawn Avenue A Reconstruction 48,27048,270 ENG25003W 77th Street D Reconstruction 90,86190,861 ENG25005Chowen Park C Reconstruction 1,414,9911,414,991 ENG25006Chowen Park E Reconstruction 878,270878,270 ENG25009Minnehaha Woods B Reconstruction 618,632618,632 ENG25010Pamela Park B (Peacdale Avenue) Reconstruction 250,399250,399 ENG25011Pamela Park C (Halifax Avenue) Reconstruction 191,481191,481 ENG25012Braemar Hills E (Washington Avenue) Reconstruction 172,485172,485 ENG25013The Heights A Reconstruction 1,127,0301,127,030 ENG25014The Heights C Reconstruction 939,192939,192 Construction Fund: Special Assess Total 24,310,2833,075,997 3,321,134 6,624,132 3,119,423 1,857,171 6,312,426 E911 POL21005Dispatch E911 Call Handling System 550,000550,000 POL23200Police Equipment Replacement 1,053,000475,000 550,000 28,000 E911 Total 1,603,000475,000 550,000 578,000 Edinborough Fund 15-069Edinborough Park Track Air Conditioning 81,00081,000 P&R21012Edinborough Park Fitness Equipment Replacement 26,00026,000 P&R25148Edinborough Park Track Surface Replacement 90,00090,000 P&R25149Edinborough Park Replace Exterior Landscaping 75,00075,000 P&R25150Edinborough Park Loading Dock 50,00050,000 P&R25151Edinborough Park Concession Replacement 24,00024,000 P&R25152Edinborough Park Amphitheater Upgrades 23,50023,500 P&R25153Edinborough Park SE Entry Concrete Replacement 27,00027,000 P&R25154Edinborough Park Locker Replacement 31,00031,000 P&R25155Edinborough Park Truck Replacement 50,00050,000 P&R25156Edinborough Park Pool Filter Replacement 70,00070,000 Edinborough Fund Total 547,500332,500 215,000 Federal ARPA P&R23100CLP & EP Interior and Exterior Public Furniture 40,00040,000 Federal ARPA Total 40,00040,000 Golf Course Fund 17-031Braemar Golf Clubhouse Lower Level 100,000100,000 FAC25120Golf Course Audio Visual Replacement 250,000250,000 Page 973 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority FAC25124Golf Course Restroom Front 9 400,000400,000 P&R21028Toro 300 Gal Sprayer 85,00085,000 P&R21036Dome Electrical Update 25,00025,000 P&R21043Cart Path Addition Hole #6 & #11 150,000150,000 P&R25160Golf Dome Netting Repairs 250,000100,000 150,000 P&R25162Golf Course Tractor & Mower Replacements 705,000100,000 295,000 160,000 50,000 100,000 P&R25164Golf Course Irrigation Upgrade 225,000225,000 P&R25166Club Car Utility Carts 78,00026,000 26,000 26,000 P&R25167Golf Maintenance Facility Lift Table 20,00020,000 P&R25168Golf Course Restroom Renovation 40,00040,000 P&R25169Golf Course Cold Storage Insulation 60,00060,000 P&R25170Update Well House #2 on Hole #13 75,00075,000 P&R25171Practice Green Enlargement / Academy 9 Pavilion 75,00075,000 P&R25172Driving Range Safety Netting 200,000200,000 P&R25175Golf Course Additional Native Areas 65,00065,000 P&R25176Golf Course New Nursery Green 100,000100,000 P&R25178Cart Path Addition Academy 9 150,000150,000 P&R25180Academy Training Facility 500,000500,000 P&R25182Golf Course Drainage Upgrade 40,00040,000 P&R25183Academy 9 Re-Grass & Irrigation 40,00040,000 P&R25184Green Renovation/Relocation Hole #8 500,000500,000 P&R25185Golf Dome Building Expansion 3,000,0003,000,000 Golf Course Fund Total 7,133,0001,581,000 571,000 1,151,000 3,630,000 100,000 100,000 HRA Fund: 72nd and France TIF DEV25102France Avenue Pedestrian/Bike Crossing 500,000500,000 HRA Fund: 72nd and France TIF Total 500,000500,000 HRA Fund: Centennial Lakes TIF 15-189Gateway Signs 150,00050,000 50,000 50,000 15-225HRA - Promenade Phase V 500,000500,000 17-01169th Street Roundabout 450,000450,000 17-018Valley View Rd Bicycle Facility Improvements 350,000350,000 DEV25100HRA Cahill Business District Branding 300,000300,000 DEV25101HRA City Entrance Markers 100,000100,000 ENG25025France Avenue Crossing Gallagher & 72nd 16,000,000500,000 1,500,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 HRA Fund: Centennial Lakes TIF Total 17,850,000950,000 2,050,000 7,050,000 7,000,000 450,000 350,000 Liquor Fund FAC23110Liquor Stores Facility Improvements 901,600297,600 324,000 280,000 Liquor Fund Total 901,600297,600 324,000 280,000 Local Option Sales Tax P&R25100Fred Richards Park 16,255,0005,500,000 9,250,000 805,000 700,000 P&R25101Braemar Park & Arena 47,140,00011,850,000 17,320,000 15,820,000 2,150,000 Page 974 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority P&R25181Golf Course Parking Lot Upgrade 1,000,0001,000,000 Local Option Sales Tax Total 64,395,00017,350,000 26,570,000 17,625,000 2,850,000 PACS Fund: Utility Franchise Fees 17-072Hwy 169 Frontage Rd/Braemar Blvd Shared-Use Paths 658,420658,420 19-301Wooddale Ave Bridge Historic Rehab 200,000200,000 19-334Olinger Boulevard Sidewalk 883,500418,800 464,700 ENG21004McCauley Trail Shared-Use Path Phase 2 392,731392,731 ENG21006France Avenue Shared-Use Paths 1,541,300762,900 778,400 ENG21007Lincoln Drive/7th Street/Malibu Drive Sidewalks 419,600419,600 ENG21009Vernon Avenue Sidewalk 131,600131,600 ENG21010Gleason Road Sidewalk 295,885295,885 ENG21011Metro Boulevard Sidewalk 444,329444,329 ENG21013West 60th Street Sidewalk 710,500710,500 ENG21014West 77th Street Sidewalk 483,100483,100 ENG21015Benton Avenue Shared-Use Path 730,400730,400 ENG21016West 64th Street Shared-Use Path 422,654422,654 ENG21017Valley View Road Sidewalk 109,100109,100 ENG21018Amundson Avenue Sidewalk 156,100156,100 ENG21019Interlachen Boulevard Shared-Use Path 381,600381,600 ENG21021Presidents A Reconstruction 233,000233,000 ENG21025Minnehaha Woods D Reconstruction 288,600288,600 ENG21026South Cornelia B Reconstruction 444,150444,150 ENG21028Hilary Lane Reconstruction 190,400190,400 ENG21030West 76th Street A Reconstruction 41,15041,150 ENG23004Benton Avenue A Reconstruction 109,800109,800 ENG25002Parklawn Avenue A Reconstruction 172,400172,400 ENG25003W 77th Street D Reconstruction 172,400172,400 ENG25005Chowen Park C Reconstruction 50,00050,000 ENG25006Chowen Park E Reconstruction 158,000158,000 ENG25013The Heights A Reconstruction 295,200295,200 ENG25014The Heights C Reconstruction 295,200295,200 ENG25050Sidewalk Inspection Program 300,00050,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 ENG25051Drive 25 Improvements 120,00020,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 ENG25052Normandale Road/Viking Drive Bike Lanes 28,20028,200 ENG25053Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan Update 100,000100,000 ENG25054Wooddale Avenue Bike Lanes 111,10091,600 19,500 ENG25055McCauley Trail Shared-Use Path 503,000503,000 ENG2505669th Street Bike Lanes 24,40024,400 ENG25057West Shore Drive Bike Boulevard 35,10035,100 ENG25058W 44th St Bike Lanes 18,10018,100 ENG25059Metro Boulevard Bike Lanes 60,90060,900 ENG25060Minnehaha Creek Pedestrian Bridge 1,200,0001,200,000 ENG25061Edina Industrial Boulevard Sidewalk 297,500297,500 ENG25062W 66th Street Sidewalk 476,000476,000 ENG25063Valley View Road Bike Lane Design 50,00050,000 Page 975 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority PACS Fund: Utility Franchise Fees Total 13,735,4192,458,645 1,665,000 3,220,650 2,085,700 1,537,550 2,767,874 Public Safety Aid FAC25121PW Building Emergency Services Radio Repeater 250,000250,000 FIR23200Fire Equipment Replacement 108,200108,200 POL23200Police Equipment Replacement 60,00060,000 POL25101Patrol Squad Car Addition 70,00070,000 POL25103Rifle-Rated Ballistic Shields 40,00040,000 POL25107PS Radio Bi-Directional Amplifier (BDA) Rplcmt 25,00025,000 Public Safety Aid Total 553,200528,200 25,000 Special Park Improvement Levy 17-143Creek Valley Irrigation 50,00050,000 19-763Tingdale Park Playground Replacement 155,000155,000 P&R21003Outdoor Athletic Field Lighting 900,000180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 P&R21039Strachauer Park Master Plan Phase II 1,100,0001,100,000 P&R21048Sherwood Park Playground Equipment 150,000150,000 P&R21049Kojetin Park Playground Equipment 165,000165,000 P&R23203Alden Park Playground Replacement 185,000185,000 P&R23206McGuire Park Playground Equipment Replacement. 250,000250,000 P&R23207Off Leash Dog Park Investments 10,00010,000 P&R23208Pamela Park Playground Equipment Replacement 300,000300,000 P&R23212York Park Playground Replacement 175,000175,000 P&R25113Fox Meadow Shelter Replacement 55,00055,000 Special Park Improvement Levy Total 3,495,000405,000 305,000 1,940,000 485,000 180,000 180,000 Special Street Levy 19-308Prospect Knolls C Reconstruction 983,386983,386 19-309Prospect Knolls D Reconstruction 299,292299,292 19-310Presidents B Reconstruction 822,660822,660 19-314Indian Trails A Reconstruction 747,279747,279 DEV25103France Avenue Branding/Lighting 2,000,0002,000,000 DEV25110HRA Grandview Maintenance District 545,000300,000 40,000 45,000 50,000 55,000 55,000 ENG21021Presidents A Reconstruction 1,417,6191,417,619 ENG21024Rolling Green Reconstruction 2,786,5642,786,564 ENG21025Minnehaha Woods D Reconstruction 783,502783,502 ENG21028Hilary Lane Reconstruction 336,442336,442 ENG23001Prospect Knolls A Reconstruction 1,470,8041,470,804 ENG23002Countryside E Reconstruction 870,245870,245 ENG23003Todd Park B Reconstruction 720,847720,847 ENG23004Benton Avenue A Reconstruction 150,027150,027 ENG25002Parklawn Avenue A Reconstruction 82,82782,827 ENG25003W 77th Street D Reconstruction 155,909155,909 ENG25005Chowen Park C Reconstruction 1,947,6301,947,630 ENG25006Chowen Park E Reconstruction 1,208,8741,208,874 ENG25009Minnehaha Woods B Reconstruction 1,061,5191,061,519 Page 976 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority ENG25010Pamela Park B (Peacdale Avenue) Reconstruction 429,663429,663 ENG25011Pamela Park C (Halifax Avenue) Reconstruction 328,566328,566 ENG25012Braemar Hills E (Washington Avenue) Reconstruction 374,045374,045 ENG25013The Heights A Reconstruction 2,444,0412,444,041 ENG25014The Heights C Reconstruction 2,036,7012,036,701 Special Street Levy Total 24,003,4424,540,279 2,793,482 3,578,843 4,263,793 2,896,986 5,930,059 Utility Fund PWK23201Utilities Equipment Replacement 2,735,000355,000 200,000 677,000 297,000 642,000 564,000 Utility Fund Total 2,735,000355,000 200,000 677,000 297,000 642,000 564,000 Utility Fund: Sewer 15-173Asset Management Software and Equipment 40,00010,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 19-308Prospect Knolls C Reconstruction 573,550573,550 19-309Prospect Knolls D Reconstruction 174,559174,559 19-310Presidents B Reconstruction 998,443998,443 19-314Indian Trails A Reconstruction 392,308392,308 19-335Sanitary Trunk Capacity Expansion York Segs 2-3 3,800,0003,800,000 19-336Sanitary Trunk Capacity Exp York Seg 4 & Fairview 4,700,0004,700,000 19-340Sanitary Targeted Inflow Reduction Project 130,000130,000 ENG21021Presidents A Reconstruction 1,720,5301,720,530 ENG21023Parklawn (Parklawn Ct) Reconstruction 28,74728,747 ENG21024Rolling Green Reconstruction 281,326281,326 ENG21025Minnehaha Woods D Reconstruction 342,836342,836 ENG21026South Cornelia B Reconstruction 1,071,9041,071,904 ENG21027South Cornelia D Reconstruction 957,073957,073 ENG21028Hilary Lane Reconstruction 303,883303,883 ENG21030West 76th Street A Reconstruction 165,248165,248 ENG2105572nd Street Sewer Line Upsize 1,600,0001,600,000 ENG23001Prospect Knolls A Reconstruction 686,265686,265 ENG23002Countryside E Reconstruction 391,999391,999 ENG23003Todd Park B Reconstruction 299,187299,187 ENG23004Benton Avenue A Reconstruction 186,198186,198 ENG23009Hilary Lane Sanitary Sewer Lining 300,000300,000 ENG23033Sanitary Trunk Capacity Exp York Avenue Hazelton 8,900,000200,000 2,000,000 500,000 5,000,000 1,200,000 ENG23034Sanitary Trunk Capacity Exp York Avenue 69th St W 1,400,0001,400,000 ENG25002Parklawn Avenue A Reconstruction 103,924103,924 ENG25003W 77th Street D Reconstruction 195,622195,622 ENG25005Chowen Park C Reconstruction 929,616929,616 ENG25006Chowen Park E Reconstruction 577,003577,003 ENG25009Minnehaha Woods B Reconstruction 464,487464,487 ENG25010Pamela Park B (Peacdale Avenue) Reconstruction 188,007188,007 ENG25011Pamela Park C (Halifax Avenue) 143,770143,770 Page 977 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority Reconstruction ENG25012Braemar Hills E (Washington Avenue) Reconstruction 34,33934,339 ENG25013The Heights A Reconstruction 858,472858,472 ENG25014The Heights C Reconstruction 715,394715,394 ENG25024Promenade Brook Pumping Improvements 100,000100,000 ENG25033Nine Mile Village Sanitary Sewer Lining 175,000175,000 ENG25034Olinger Road Sanitary Sewer Replacement 100,000100,000 PW23009Lift Station Pump and VFD Renewal 180,00030,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 PW23010Nine Mile Village Sewer Lining 175,000175,000 PW23011Olinger Road Dip Replacement: 130 LF + Road Repair 80,00080,000 Utility Fund: Sewer Total 34,464,6907,508,973 3,683,121 8,585,538 7,149,689 4,233,894 3,303,475 Utility Fund: Storm 15-173Asset Management Software and Equipment 60,00015,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 17-01169th Street Roundabout 100,000100,000 19-301Wooddale Ave Bridge Historic Rehab 400,000400,000 19-308Prospect Knolls C Reconstruction 1,386,9361,386,936 19-309Prospect Knolls D Reconstruction 422,111422,111 19-310Presidents B Reconstruction 1,305,0781,305,078 19-314Indian Trails A Reconstruction 1,038,4751,038,475 19-342Clean Wtr Strat & Lake Cornelia Clean Water Proj 750,000750,000 19-346CWRMP Model Update 200,000200,000 ENG21021Presidents A Reconstruction 2,248,9282,248,928 ENG21023Parklawn (Parklawn Ct) Reconstruction 54,32954,329 ENG21024Rolling Green Reconstruction 4,009,2434,009,243 ENG21025Minnehaha Woods D Reconstruction 946,760946,760 ENG21026South Cornelia B Reconstruction 2,049,8752,049,875 ENG21027South Cornelia D Reconstruction 1,830,2771,830,277 ENG21028Hilary Lane Reconstruction 1,009,2451,009,245 ENG21030West 76th Street A Reconstruction 385,207385,207 ENG21056Stormwater Infrastructure Maintenance 820,000190,000 200,000 210,000 220,000 ENG21057Natural Areas Management 710,000170,000 175,000 180,000 185,000 ENG23001Prospect Knolls A Reconstruction 1,583,4181,583,418 ENG23002Countryside E Reconstruction 850,851850,851 ENG23003Todd Park B Reconstruction 826,220826,220 ENG23004Benton Avenue A Reconstruction 434,318434,318 ENG23010Concord Flood Infrastrucure Project #2 area 10,650,000200,000 950,000 9,500,000 ENG23011Arden & 50th Flood Infrastructure Project #3 Area 650,000200,000 450,000 ENG23012Lake Cornelia and Normandale Park Flood Infras 16,000,00016,000,000 ENG23013France Avenue Crossing (Minnehaha Creek) 800,000200,000 600,000 ENG23014Adaptive Level Management Project Ph 2 Minnehaha 2,700,000200,000 2,500,000 ENG23015Adaptive Level Management Project Nine Mile Creek 2,500,0002,500,000 ENG23016Minor Pipe and Grading Project (Citywide)2,500,0002,500,000 Page 978 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority ENG23017Chowen and 60th Flood Project 1,100,0001,100,000 ENG25002Parklawn Avenue A Reconstruction 226,673226,673 ENG25003W 77th Street D Reconstruction 426,678426,678 ENG25005Chowen Park C Reconstruction 2,460,7762,460,776 ENG25006Chowen Park E Reconstruction 1,527,3781,527,378 ENG25009Minnehaha Woods B Reconstruction 1,282,7071,282,707 ENG25010Pamela Park B (Peacdale Avenue) Reconstruction 454,631454,631 ENG25011Pamela Park C (Halifax Avenue) Reconstruction 347,659347,659 ENG25012Braemar Hills E (Washington Avenue) Reconstruction 332,148332,148 ENG25013The Heights A Reconstruction 2,370,7172,370,717 ENG25014The Heights C Reconstruction 1,729,9361,729,936 ENG25024Promenade Brook Pumping Improvements 100,000100,000 ENG2502750th St Concrete Curb and Gutter Replacement 55,00055,000 ENG25036CWS 1 - Lake & Pond Sediment Phosphorus Sequest 550,00050,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 ENG25037CWS 2 - Targeted Intensive Street Sweeping 100,00010,000 20,000 70,000 ENG25038CWS 3 - Assurance, Monitoring, Lakegrades 215,00040,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 ENG25039CWS 4 - Rough Fish Management 190,00030,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 ENG25040CWS 5 - New Clean Water Infrastructure 150,000150,000 Utility Fund: Storm Total 72,840,5747,579,006 7,301,794 11,602,593 16,968,619 20,565,315 8,823,247 Utility Fund: Water 15-162New Water Treatment Plant 5 - Southdale 18,000,00018,000,000 15-173Asset Management Software and Equipment 40,00010,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 19-308Prospect Knolls C Reconstruction 854,576854,576 19-309Prospect Knolls D Reconstruction 260,088260,088 19-310Presidents B Reconstruction 1,413,4941,413,494 19-314Indian Trails A Reconstruction 584,530584,530 19-351Water Main Condition Assessment 955,000150,000 160,000 160,000 165,000 160,000 160,000 19-913Well #7 Rehabilitation 300,000180,000 120,000 19-915Well #11 Rehabilitation and Facility Improvements 240,000120,000 120,000 19-918Well #20 Rehabilitation 180,000180,000 ENG21021Presidents A Reconstruction 2,435,7532,435,753 ENG21023Parklawn (Parklawn Ct) Reconstruction 54,74554,745 ENG21024Rolling Green Reconstruction 1,676,6781,676,678 ENG21025Minnehaha Woods D Reconstruction 897,902897,902 ENG21026South Cornelia B Reconstruction 1,530,6691,530,669 ENG21027South Cornelia D Reconstruction 2,343,5492,343,549 ENG21028Hilary Lane Reconstruction 786,652786,652 ENG21030West 76th Street A Reconstruction 247,724247,724 ENG21034Well #5 69th Street Construct Underground Wellhead 350,000350,000 ENG21058Water Supply Grandview Area PH 3 2,500,0002,500,000 ENG21059Water Supply 50th and France 2,000,0002,000,000 ENG21060Water Supply Pentagon Park 1,000,0001,000,000 Page 979 of 1086 Total20252026202720282029Source2030Project #Priority ENG23001Prospect Knolls A Reconstruction 1,278,1481,278,148 ENG23002Countryside E Reconstruction 584,093584,093 ENG23003Todd Park B Reconstruction 783,583783,583 ENG23004Benton Avenue A Reconstruction 369,875369,875 ENG23035Watermain Rehabilitation (Citywide)1,400,0001,400,000 ENG23036Grandview Area Watermain Improvements PH 2 240,000240,000 ENG25002Parklawn Avenue A Reconstruction 201,768201,768 ENG25003W 77th Street D Reconstruction 379,800379,800 ENG25005Chowen Park C Reconstruction 2,434,7052,434,705 ENG25006Chowen Park E Reconstruction 1,511,1961,511,196 ENG25009Minnehaha Woods B Reconstruction 692,075692,075 ENG25010Pamela Park B (Peacdale Avenue) Reconstruction 492,398492,398 ENG25011Pamela Park C (Halifax Avenue) Reconstruction 376,540376,540 ENG25012Braemar Hills E (Washington Avenue) Reconstruction 51,16451,164 ENG25013The Heights A Reconstruction 2,248,3762,248,376 ENG25014The Heights C Reconstruction 1,873,6471,873,647 ENG25024Promenade Brook Pumping Improvements 100,000100,000 ENG25043Chapel Drive Watermain Rehabilitation 300,000300,000 ENG25044Maloney Ave Watermain Rehabilitation 1,000,0001,000,000 ENG25045Watermain Replacement under NMC at 5901 Lincoln Dr 50,00050,000 ENG25046Watermain Replcmnt LB Tr/Shannon Dr/Coventry Way 225,000225,000 ENG25047Heights Neighborhood Watermain Rehabilitation 6,250,0006,250,000 FAC25109Fire Station #2 York Ave. Building Demo 500,000500,000 PW23002Well #15 Rehabilitation and Facility Improvements 140,000140,000 PW23004Well #10 Rehabilitation and Facility Improvements 120,000120,000 PW23005Well #12 Rehabilitation and Facility Improvements 180,000180,000 PW23006Well #13 Rehabilitation and Facility Improvements 180,000180,000 PW23007Well #2 Rehabilitation and Facility Improvements 170,000170,000 PW23008Well #6 Rehabilitation and Facility Improvements 180,000180,000 PWK25101Water Meter Radio Receivers 4,970,0001,300,000 880,000 900,000 930,000 960,000 PWK25102Filter Media Replacement 450,000450,000 PWK25103Fiber Installation, Van Valkenburg Tower 160,000160,000 Utility Fund: Water Total 68,543,7287,119,247 5,402,557 5,041,877 27,891,136 11,728,207 11,360,704 GRAND TOTAL 408,410,23062,191,547 70,224,264 76,182,178 90,808,617 57,210,712 51,792,912 Page 980 of 1086 State of Minnesota County of Hennepin Taxing Jurisdiction of I, Clerk of hereby certify that a resolution establishing the levy upon taxable property in said Taxing Jurisdiction was passed bythe governing body at a duly convened meeting held on December 17 , 2024. On motion it was resolved that the following sums of money be raised by tax upon the taxable property in said Taxing Jurisdiction for the following purposes for the current year: *The levy amount by line item should already be reduced by Local Government Aid (LGA) and other resources used to finance your taxing jurisdiction's budget. ** Provide a breakdown of the certified levy by individual bond on page 2. *** Per M.S. 275.61, Levies for the payment of debt obligations that are approved by voters after June 30, 2008 must be levied on net tax capacity. I further certify that I have compared the foregoing with the original entry of the minutes of the meeting so held on , 2024 as the same are recorded in the Book of Records of said Taxing Jurisdiction, and that the same is a correct transcript therefrom. Given under my hand on this 17th day of December , 2024. Taxing Jurisdiction Clerk TOTAL TAX CAPACITY AND MARKET VALUE BASED LEVIES -$ A. TOTAL TAX CAPACITY BASED LEVY - B. MARKET VALUE BASED REFERENDUM LEVY*** December 17 LEVY ITEM CERTIFIED LEVY* 1. General Revenue City of Edina 2025 FINAL LEVY CERTIFICATION Sharon Allison City of Edina 2. Bonded Indebtedness** Page 981 of 1086 State of Minnesota County of Hennepin Taxing Jurisdiction of I, Clerk of hereby certify that a resolution establishing the levy upon taxable property in said Taxing Jurisdiction was passed bythe governing body at a duly convened meeting held on December 17 , 2024. On motion it was resolved that the following sums of money be raised by tax upon the taxable property in said Taxing Jurisdiction for the following purposes for the current year: *The levy amount by line item should already be reduced by Local Government Aid (LGA) and other resources used to finance your taxing jurisdiction's budget. ** Provide a breakdown of the certified levy by individual bond on page 2. *** Per M.S. 275.61, Levies for the payment of debt obligations that are approved by voters after June 30, 2008 must be levied on net tax capacity. I further certify that I have compared the foregoing with the original entry of the minutes of the meeting so held on , 2024 as the same are recorded in the Book of Records of said Taxing Jurisdiction, and that the same is a correct transcript therefrom. Given under my hand on this 17th day of December , 2024. December 17 TOTAL TAX CAPACITY AND MARKET VALUE BASED LEVIES -$ Taxing Jurisdiction Clerk HRA/EDA A. TOTAL TAX CAPACITY BASED LEVY - B. MARKET VALUE BASED REFERENDUM LEVY*** HRA Edina HRA 2025 FINAL LEVY CERTIFICATION Sharon Allison Edina HRA LEVY ITEM CERTIFIED LEVY* Page 982 of 1086 BOND DESCRIPTION CERTIFIED LEVY CIP Plan Bonds - Series 2016A (Fire)406,000.00 CIP Plan Bonds - Series 2017C (PW)1,030,000.00 General Obligation - Series 2021B (2013A Refunding) (PW)482,000.00 HRA Public Project Bonds - Series 2015A (Gym)398,000.00 HRA Public Project Bonds - Series 2014 (Dome)1,165,100.00 General Obligation - Series 2024A (Fire)1,896,539.00 DEBT SERVICE TOTAL**5,377,639.00$ ** This must match the totals for debt service reported on page 1. Per M.S. 475.61 all debt must be accounted for in the resolution. If the amount levied is less than the required amount from the payment schedule for the bond, you must submit a resolution stating that there are sufficient funds for that bond. This can be included in the same resolution with your levy. LEVY CERTIFICATION - DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Taxing Jurisdiction City of Edina 3 Page 983 of 1086 2025 Budget –An Investment in Public Safety December 17, 2024 Page 984 of 1086 Agenda •Background •2025 Budget and Levies •2025 –2030 Capital Improvement Plan •Questions? Page 985 of 1086 Timeline Date Event Action Dec 19, 2023 Council Meeting Adopted 2024-2025 Budget and Workplan April 29th Goal Setting Council Retreat May 10th Finance Deadline Departments submit CIP requests June 20th CIP Prioritization Committee Review June 25th CIP Prioritization Committee + Council Tours June 21 –August 1st CIP Prioritization Community Engagement July 9 –17th ELT Meeting ELT review and prioritization July 18th Finalize Draft CIP City Manager Review August 20th Work Session Draft CIP presented to Council Sept. 17th Council Meeting Adopt preliminary 2025 levy Dec. 3rd Council Work session Council Meeting Public hearing and adopt final CIP and 2025 levy Dec. 17th Council Meeting Adopt final 2025 Levy and CIP 2025-2030 January 2025 Finance Deadline Publish detail CIP book to website Page 986 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov Background Page 987 of 1086 Page 988 of 1086 Biennial Budget Process 2024 (Even Year) First year of 2024-2025 Budget Review/approve of 2025-2030 CIP 2025 (Odd Year) Second year of 2024-2025 Budget Approve 2026-2027 budget, including CIP levy Page 989 of 1086 2025 Tax Levy 2024 2025 2025 Adopted Original Proposed Tentatively approved 12/19/2023 General Fund $43,744,165 $48,535,573 $48,858,215 Debt Service $3,471,700 $5,785,900 $5,377,639 Construction $4,470,000 $5,010,000 $4,910,000 Special Street $1,481,000 $1,762,000 $1,762,000 Special Park $1,000,000 $400,000 $400,000 HRA $251,700 $259,300 $259,300 Total Tax Levy $54,418,565 $61,752,773 $61,567,154 % Increase 9.15%13.48%13.14% 5.46% of Increase for Public Safety Expansion (FS2 & PD/FF) Page 990 of 1086 Priorities received from Council Retreat 1.Maintenance & Preservation 2.Accessibility & Inclusion 3.Flexibility for future use Page 991 of 1086 Criteria Review Criteria 1: Project Justification & Urgency •Health, safety & regulatory compliance, asset functionality, expansion/level of service Criteria 2: Values Impact Equity: Celebrating the diversity of the community and proactively working together to eliminate systemic and institutional barriers. Health: Collaborative approach to improving people's health by including health considerations into decision-making across policy areas. Sustainability: Those who live and work in Edina can imagine and achieve a future where the earth and all who live on it thrive. Community Engagement: Foster an inclusive, informed and engaged community. Stewardship: Make wise investments that focus on the best long-term value for residents. Page 992 of 1086 CIP Story Map Page 993 of 1086 How taxation works? •Statutory required meeting •Breakdown of % between different level Hennepin County 29% City of Edina 25% Edina School District 39% Watershed, Metro Districts, & Other 7% Page 994 of 1086 Taxation Process •Valuation notices sent each March for taxes payable the following year •This is the time to appeal valuation •Set Preliminary Levy on September •Proposed Tax Notices mailed November 12 •Public Meeting for Final Levy on December 3 •Adopt Final Levy by December 28 March – Valuation Notices Appeal Process for Valuation September – Preliminary Levy November – Tax NoticesTonight – Public Meeting December – Adopt Budget & Tax Levy Page 995 of 1086 Residential Tax Calculation – Non-Homestead Parcel Base Value x Base Class Rate = Base Tax Capacity Parcel Value over Base x Over Base Rate = Tax Capacity Base Tax Capacity + Value Over Base Tax Capacity = Total Tax Capacity Page 996 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov 2025 Budget and Levies Page 997 of 1086 How does Edina compare? 2025 Preliminary Levy Increase of 13.14% Jurisdiction 2025 Proposed Tax Increase Hennepin County City Average 10.43% Statewide City Average 8.8% Hennepin County 5.5% SD 270 (Hopkins)-2.7% SD 271 (Bloomington)4.4% SD 272 (Eden Prairie)4.7% SD 273 (Edina)4.9% SD 280 (Richfield)4.3% Page 998 of 1086 How does Edina compare? City Tax Rate Tax $ on $712,300 Tax $ on $1M Plymouth 24.15%$1,848 $2,717 Maple Grove 29.47%$2,256 $3,315 Eden Prairie 30.75%$2,354 $3,459 Edina 31.41%$2,405 $3,534 Lakeville 32.69%$2,502 $3,678 Eagan 36.13%$2,765 $4,064 Minnetonka 37.86%$2,898 $4,259 Apple Valley 41.67%$3,190 $4,688 Burnsville 46.48%$3,558 $5,229 St. Louis Park 48.46%$3,709 $5,452 Page 999 of 1086 2025 General Fund 73% 9% 9% 4%2%2% 1% SOURCES Property Tax Levy (73%) Charges for Services (9%) Licenses & Permits (9%) Intergovernmental (4%) Other (2%) Franchise Fees & Other taxes (2%) Fines & Forfeitures (1%) Page 1000 of 1086 Subtotal by Department 28% 16% 13% 13% 9% 4% 4% 4% 3%3% 2%1% FUNCTION Police (28%) Fire (15%) Parks & Recreation (13%) Public Works (13%) Engineering (9%) I.T. (4%) Development (4%) Administration - Supporting (4%) Human Resource Management (3%) Finance (3%) Administration - Operating (2%) Communications (1%) •Only includes portions funded with levy (non-franchise fee, non-utilities etc). •Does not include equipment, capital or debt service. Page 1001 of 1086 Function Department Division % of Total Exp Operating Police Police Administration 5.79% Operating Police Dispatch 3.39% Operating Police Patrol 16.04% Operating Police Investigations 3.00% Police Department – 28% Additional services -School Liaisons -Drug Task Force -Neighborhood Engagement -Police Records -911 Dispatch 86 FTE Page 1002 of 1086 Fire Department – 15% Function Department Division % of Total Exp Operating Fire Fire 14.12% Operating Fire Building Inspections 0.00% Operating Fire Public Health 1.32% Additional services -Ambulance Service (ALS) -Fire Response -Fire Prevention (Fire Marshal) -Training Facility -Organics Recycling -Rental Inspections -Residential Redevelopment 79 FTE Page 1003 of 1086 Parks & Recreation Department – 13% Function Department Division % of Total Exp Operating Parks & Recreation Park Administration 2.94% Operating Parks & Recreation Recreation 0.68% Operating Parks & Recreation Arts & Culture 0.03% Operating Parks & Recreation Park Maintenance 9.55% Additional services -Recreation Programs -Forestry -Braemar Golf -Braemar Arena -Centennial Lakes -Edina Aquatic Center -Edinborough Park -Edina Liquor 68 FTE Page 1004 of 1086 Public Works Department – 13% Function Department Division % of Total Exp Operating Public Works Sidewalks & Bridges Maintenance & Repairs 0.70% Operating Public Works Street Maintenance & Repairs 2.28% Operating Public Works Snow Removal 0.49% Operating Public Works Traffic Safety 0.28% Operating Public Works General Maintenance 8.28% Operating Public Works Public Works Admin 0.61% Additional services -Water & Sewer -Equipment Operations 50 FTE Page 1005 of 1086 Engineering Department – 13% Function Department Division % of Total Exp Operating Engineering Engineering General 1.28% Operating Engineering Construction Management 1.34% Operating Engineering Transportation 0.69% Operating Engineering Engineering Services 1.42% Operating Engineering Electrical/HVAC 2.98% Operating Engineering Facilities 1.31% Operating Engineering Sustainability 0.00% Additional services -Design & Construction -Engineering Services & Water Resources 27 FTE Page 1006 of 1086 Community Development Department – 4% Function Department Division % of Total Exp Operating Community Development Planning 1.84% Operating Community Development Assessing 2.84% Operating Community Development Affordable Housing 0.00% Additional services -Planning & Zoning -Economic Development -Heritage Preservation 14 FTE Page 1007 of 1086 Administrative - Operating Department – 2% Function Department Division % of Total Exp Operating Administrative City Clerk 0.43% Operating Administrative City Council 0.69% Operating Administrative Equity 0.39% Additional services -City Council Support & Meeting Management -B&C Management -HRRC & Human Services Task Force -Elections -Data Practices & Records Retention -Liquor Licensing -Community Engagement -Diversity, Equity & Inclusion -Special Projects 8 FTE Page 1008 of 1086 Support Departments – 16% Function Department Division % of Total Exp Supporting I.T.I.T.4.43% Supporting Human Resource Management Human Resources 3.43% Supporting Finance Finance 3.07% Supporting Administrative – Support Administration 3.82% Supporting Communications Communications 0.94% Finance -Budget & CIP -Audit -Financial Management & Planning -Investments -Bonding -Purchasing -Utility Billing -Accounts Payable & Accounts Receivable Communications -City Hall Reception -Media & Public Relations -Website & Social Media -Print Publications -Video Production Human Resources -Recruitment & Selection -Compensation & Benefits -Employee & Labor Relations -Risk Management & Safety -Payroll Information Technology -Network & Servers -Telecommunications -End User Support -Security -Geographic Information Systems (GIS) IT - 9 FTE Human Resources – 7 FTE Finance – 10 FTE Communications -7 FTE Page 1009 of 1086 Budgeted FTE (all funds) 2023 2024 2025 Budget Administration 8.00 8.00 8.00 Information Technology 9.00 9.00 9.00 Communications 7.00 7.00 7.00 Community Development 14.00 14.00 14.00 Engineering 27.00 27.00 27.00 Finance 10.00 10.00 10.00 Fire 73.00 73.00 79.00 Human Resources 6.00 6.00 6.00 Parks & Recreation 66.00 67.00 68.00 Police 80.00 84.00 86.00 Public Works 49.00 49.00 50.00 Total 349.00 354.00 364.00 Page 1010 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov 2025 – 2030 Capital Improvement Plan Page 1011 of 1086 2025 – 2030 CIP by Category Infrastructure 55%Buildings 30% Equipment and Vehicles 6% Parks 6% Land 2%Technology 1% •Departments submitted 311 projects totaling $692 million over six years •$497M has designated funding Page 1012 of 1086 Utility Funds 36% Other Funds 4% HRA Funds 4% PACS Fund 3% CIP Bonds 17.7% LOST 13% Special Assessment 4.9% Special Street Levy 5% CIP Levy 4% Equipment Replacement Levy 4%MSA 2% Grant/Donation 1%SPIL 1% PEG Comcast Fees 0.2% Bridge Maintenance 0.2% Construction Fund 53% 2025 – 2030 CIP by Funding Source Page 1013 of 1086 Projection of CIP $0 $327,000 $2,000,000 $1,900,000 $2,205,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 CIP Levy Projected CIP Levy *Subject to change: This slide presents a potential projection based on various financial assumptions and decisions that the City Council would need to make. Page 1014 of 1086 Bonding •2026 (2025 projects, 2026 debt levy impact) •Aquatic & Art Center $5.94M •Highway 100 Interchange (FS 3) $4M •2027 •Citywide Roof $2.7M •Public Works Cold Storage $2.3M •2028 •City Hall/PD Improvement – Phase 1 $6.3M •Edinborough $30M •2029 •Public Works Improvement $4.2M •Golf Club House/Event Center $27M?? Subject to change: This slide presents a potential projects that require City Council direction. Page 1015 of 1086 Debt Service Discussion - 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000 10,000,000 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Gymnasium Fire Station Public Works Facility Sports Dome Community Health & Safety Center Aquatic & Art Center Citywide Roof Public Works Cold Storage Highway 100 Interchange (FS 3)City Hall/PD Improvement Phase 1 Edinborough Improvements Golf Course Event Center *Subject to change: This slide presents a potential projection based on various financial assumptions and decisions that the City Council would need to make regarding a variety of projects. Page 1016 of 1086 Financial Management Plan (FMP) Projections 5.46% in 2025 and 6.73% in 2026 for Public Safety Expansion (FS2 & PD/FF) *Subject to change: This slide presents a potential projection based on various financial assumptions and decisions that the City Council would need to make regarding a variety of projects. 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Actual Budget Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected GENERAL FUND LEVY 39,820,200$ 43,744,165$ 48,858,215$ 54,672,959$ 58,760,380$ 63,395,401$ 68,324,045$ 73,357,475$ EXISTING DEBT SERVICE LEVIES Debt Service Levies Total 3,230,000 3,471,700 5,377,639 6,986,864 7,454,451 7,778,287 7,492,346 8,453,025 CONSTRUCTION FUND LEVIES Capital Improvement Plan Levy 2,000,000 2,000,000 1,900,000 2,205,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 Equipment Levy 2,350,000 2,470,000 3,010,000 2,660,000 3,832,485 4,417,279 4,373,850 4,000,000 Street Special Levy 1,210,400 1,481,000 1,762,000 2,053,000 2,355,400 2,669,000 2,994,200 3,331,400 Special Park Improvement Levy 1,000,000 1,000,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Construction Levies Total 6,560,400 6,951,000 7,072,000 7,318,000 9,587,885 11,486,279 13,368,050 14,331,400 HRA Fund Levies HRA Operating Levy 244,400 251,700 259,300 267,100 275,100 283,400 291,900 300,700 HRA Levies Total 244,400 251,700 259,300 267,100 275,100 283,400 291,900 300,700 TOTAL PROPERTY TAX LEVIED 49,855,000$ 54,418,565$ 61,567,154$ 69,244,923$ 76,077,815$ 82,943,366$ 89,476,340$ 96,442,600$ Increase from Prior Year 9.89%9.15%13.14%12.47%9.87%9.02%7.88%7.79% *Community Health & Safety Center & PS 5.46%6.73% Page 1017 of 1086 Breakdown of Levy Increase *Base increases support public safety departments too 5.90% 3.50% 2.00% 0.80%0.50%0.50% 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% 2025 Levy Increase Base Debt Service Fire Station New Public Safety Positions Equipment & Capital Increase Street Assessment Policy Change Zoning Comprehensive Plan HRA Debt Service other Increase Amount % of Total Increase % of Increase of Total Levy Increase (13.14%) Public Safety Expansion % of Total Levy New Public Safety Positions $ 1,074,000 15.0%2.0%2.0%1.7% Debt Service Fire Station $ 1,896,539 26.5%3.5%3.5%3.1% Debt Service Other $ 9,400 0.1%0.0%0.0% Street Assessment Policy Change $ 281,000 3.9%0.5%0.5% Equipment & Capital Increase $ 440,000 6.2%0.8%0.7% Zoning Comprehensive Plan $ 250,000 3.5%0.5%0.4% HRA Increase $ 7,600 0.1%0.0%0.0% Base Increases (health care, market adjustments, inflation, contract vendor increases, etc. )$ 3,190,050 44.6%5.9%*5.2% $ 7,148,589 100%13.14%*5.46%12% Total Levy $ 61,567,154 Levy funded position increases: 0.5 FTE Parks & Rec Program & Facility Coordinator (July 2025) 1 FTE Patrol Officer (October 2025) 1 FTE Mental Health Investigator (July 2024) 1 FTE Neighborhood Engagement Officer (July 2025) 6 FTE Firefighter/Paramedic (July 2025) Page 1018 of 1086 Possible Reductions & Impact on out year projected levy •The City adopts a levy amount in taxes. •Reducing the proposed 2025 levy impacts outyear projections percentage increase (projected dollar amount would stay the same until modified by Staff/Council). •Projected levy is based on capital needs, debt service and estimated increases. •Staff’s recommendations are listed below in favorable to least favorable. 2025 Impact 2026 Projected* 1. Adopt Budget as Proposed 13.14% Increase 12.47% Increase 2. Use reserves to pay for zoning amendment and design cold storage site 12.13% Increase 13.48% Increase 3. Option 2 + Equipment revisions 11.92% Increase 13.69% Increase 4. Option 3 + Defer Lewis Park to future year 10.27% Increase 15.40% Increase 5. Option 4 + Delay Hiring of Paramedic Firefighters to 1/2026 9.44% Increase 16.27% Increase 6. All above + 1% General Fund Reduction 8.44% Increase 17.34% Increase *2026 Projected levy amount subject to change with 2026-27 operating budget discussions. Percentages shown are based off levy amount in FMP projections from September. Page 1019 of 1086 Details of Possible Reductions Reductions Amount Impact 2025 2026 Impact Assumptions Pay for the $250K zoning amendment with cash reserves instead of levying for it in 2025 250,000 -0.46%Use of reserves, question about 2026 budgeting of zoning and comprehensive plans TBD at later date Pay for the design costs of the Cold Storage building with cash reserves instead of levying for it in 2025 300,000 -0.55%We would eventually bond for this project and reimburse reserves. Defer Lewis Park Project to future year TBD 900,000 -1.65%Will need to be reviewed in context of 2026 capital projects. Helps levy but will impact capital needs. Equipment Revisions 112,000 -0.21%No impact until equipment is up for replacement after running full usage life Delay hiring new paramedic firefighters to January 2026 (6 FTE, budgeted for ½ year)450,000 -0.83%Full impact versus phased in approach in 2026 1% General Fund Service Cut 545,000 -1.00% Due to timing constraints, reductions would need to be made by management to implement in time. Goal would be across the board, but some areas may be cut more or less depending on contracts and obligations. Page 1020 of 1086 Zoning Code Update Background: It has been 54 years since the last major update of Edina’s zoning ordinance. The zoning ordinance should be better aligned with the Comprehensive Plan and small area plans or contemporary types of development. Proposed Reduction: Pay for the $250K zoning amendment with cash reserves instead of levying for it in 2025 Impact: •Use of reserves, question about 2026 budgeting of zoning and comprehensive plans TBD at later date. •If not completed, implementing the Comprehensive Plan and small area plans will continue to be difficult •If not completed, continue to rely on rezoning to PUD for desired development, even for simple projects •If not completed, lack of clear expectations among developers, residents and elected officials on what can be built on a particular property, contributing to community frustration, lack of transparency and administrative challenges. Levy Savings: - $250,000 or -0.46% Page 1021 of 1086 Design of Cold Storage Site Background: A 2020 assessment of the roof structure found several areas that were compromised that required immediate fixes. The repairs were considered short-term with the recommendation the building be replaced in the next 5-7 years. Staff are asking for design funds to review the structure. Proposed Reduction: Use Reserves to pay for design of Cold Storage Building. Repairs will likely require bonding, staff would bond for all costs including design and reimburse the construction fund for the design costs in the future. Impact of not completing: Delaying the project could push the short-term repairs of this building past the recommendation of the engineer. The building structure would need to be re-evaluated to ensure continued use is safe. This facility holds many pieces of equipment and outside storage would impact lifespans. Levy Savings: - $XXX or -0.55%Levy Savings: - $300,000 or -0.55% Page 1022 of 1086 Delay Lewis Park to a Future Year Background: Project would be delayed to a future year to be determined in consideration of all other capital needs/priorities (no additional increase planned for capital). Impact: This would likely result in additional timeframe to complete engagement and planning for the project. Unknown impact of future identified park shelter replacements at Strachauer Park (estimated 2027), Normandale Park (est. 2028), and Highland Park (est. 2029). Elimination of the project would create a vast hardship on area park users, the Edina Hockey Association, the Edina Soccer Association, the Edina Soccer Club, and prevent future recreation programming for the park service area. Levy Savings: - $900,000 or -1.65% Lewis Park (2025 CIP) Built 1974 Arden Park Built 2019 Page 1023 of 1086 Lewis Park (2025 CIP) Built 1974 Strachauer Park (2027 CIP) Built 1974 Normandale Park (2028 CIP) Built 1974 Arden Park Built 2019 Pamela Park Built 2015 Cornelia School Park Built 1997 Park Shelter Replacement Projects Page 1024 of 1086 Delay hiring Paramedic Firefighters to January 2026 Background: Budget has a proposed addition of six additional paramedic firefighters with a proposed hire date of July 2025 (1/2 positions in 2025 and full positions for 2026). Proposed Reduction: Delay hiring six additional Paramedic Firefighters until 1/2026. Impact: : Delaying hiring reduces the ability to meet response needs and enhance crew size/crew relief •2024 engine crew size at minimum (2) •Best practice (4) person engine company •2024 shift mandates (23) •Staff forced to stay due to sick call Levy Savings: - $450,000 or -0.83% Page 1025 of 1086 Equipment Revisions Background – Following equipment were part of equipment replacement plan to be replaced with fundings from Equipment replacement levy. Proposed revision – •$25,000 – Centennial Lakes Garage Safety Equipment Improvement (2024) •$50,000 – Mobile Pro Defender Camera System from PS Aid funding •$37,000 – Mobile Air Cart Response from PS Aid fundings Impact – No impact until future equipment replacement year. Page 1026 of 1086 1% General Fund Service Reduction Background: This would be the last reduction proposed by Staff. Proposed Reduction: Reduce General Fund Levy by 1% Impact: Due to timing constraints, reductions would need to be made by management to implement in time. Goal would be across the board, but some areas may be cut more or less depending on contracts and other obligations. Levy Savings: - $545,000 or -1.00% Page 1027 of 1086 2025 Tax Levy 2024 2025 2025 Adopted Original Proposed * Tentatively approved 12/19/2023 General Fund $43,744,165 $48,535,573 $48,858,215 Debt Service $3,471,700 $5,785,900 $5,377,639 Construction $4,470,000 $5,010,000 $4,910,000 Special Street $1,481,000 $1,762,000 $1,762,000 Special Park $1,000,000 $400,000 $400,000 HRA $251,700 $259,300 $259,300 Total Tax Levy $54,418,565 $61,752,773 $61,567,154 % Increase 9.15%13.48%13.14% 5.46% of Increase for Public Safety Expansion (FS2 & PD/FF) Page 1028 of 1086 Possible Reductions & Impact on out year projected levy •The City adopts a levy amount in taxes. •Reducing the proposed 2025 levy impacts outyear projections percentage increase (projected dollar amount would stay the same until modified by Staff/Council). •Projected levy is based on capital needs, debt service and estimated increases. •Staff’s recommendations are listed below in favorable to least favorable. 2025 Impact 2026 Projected* 1. Adopt Budget as Proposed 13.14% Increase 12.47% Increase 2. Use reserves to pay for zoning amendment and design cold storage site 12.13% Increase 13.48% Increase 3. Option 2 + Equipment revisions 11.92% Increase 13.69% Increase 4. Option 3 + Defer Lewis Park to future year 10.27% Increase 15.40% Increase 5. Option 4 + Delay Hiring of Paramedic Firefighters to 1/2026 9.44% Increase 16.27% Increase 6. All above + 1% General Fund Reduction 8.44% Increase 17.34% Increase *2026 Projected levy amount subject to change with 2026-27 operating budget discussions. Percentages shown are based off levy amount in FMP projections from September. Page 1029 of 1086 Levy Impact – All possible reductions Amount Impact 2025 Tax $ on $712,300 $2,429 1. Use reserves to pay for zoning amendment $250,000 -0.46%-$11/year 2. Use reserves to pay for cold storage site design $300,000 -0.55%-$13/year 3. Equipment revisions $112,000 -0.21%-$5/year 4. De fer Lewis Park to future year $900,000 -1.65%-$37/year 5. De lay Hiring of Paramedic Firefighters to 1/2026 $450,000 -0.83%-$19/year 6. 1% General Fund service cut $545,000 -1.00%-$23/year Page 1030 of 1086 Estimated Market Value 9 9.8 10.4 10.9 11.6 12.4 12.9 13.3 13.7 15.4 16.6 17.3 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Estimated Market Value Estimated Market Value$ BillionsPage 1031 of 1086 Historical Tax Capacity 108 117.3 125.1 131.6 141.3 150.7 157 163.8 169.2 189.6 204.9 212.5 0 50 100 150 200 250 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Tax Capacity Tax Capacity$ MillionsPage 1032 of 1086 2025 Estimated Levy Impact Edina Median Value Home Edina Estimated Market Value 2024 2025 Change 2024 2025 Change $696,600 $713,200 2.3%$16.6M $17.2M 3.7% Page 1033 of 1086 Property Tax History 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Median Value $438,800 $457,300 $466,500 $501,000 $530,650 $548,500 $551,300 $571,800 $659,900 $696,600 $712,300 City tax $1,195 $1,266 $1,319 $1,393 $1,474 $1,566 $1,623 $1,706 $1,964 $2,122 $2,404 Total tax $5,835 $6,276 $6,367 $6,715 $6,982 $7,251 $7,119 $7,413 $8,396 $8,962 $9,665 $1,964 $2,122 $2,404 $8,396 $8,962 $9,665 $- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 "Median" Value Home Page 1034 of 1086 2025 General Fund $67 Risk Management $3 Debt Service Fund $25 Liquor Fund $16 Equip. Operations $2 Construction Fund $24 IT $3 Facilities $2 Special Revenue Funds, including HRA $13 Internal Service Funds $10 Enterprise Funds $67 Governmental Funds $129 Edina Consolidated Budget (in millions) $206 Park Enterprises $15 Utility Fund $36 Page 1035 of 1086 2023 2024 2025 Actual Budget Budget GENERAL FUND LEVY 39,820,200$ 43,744,165$ 48,858,215$ EXISTING DEBT SERVICE LEVIES City Hall Debt Service 2010A - - - Gymnasium Debt Service 2015 HRA 392,000 392,000 398,000 Fire Station Debt Service 2016A 403,000 403,000 406,000 Public Works Facility Debt Service 2017C & 2013A 1,269,000 1,508,000 1,512,000 Sports Dome 2014 HRA 1,166,000 1,168,700 1,165,100 Community Health & Safety Center Debt Service 2024A - - 1,133,449 Community Health & Safety Center Debt Service 2024B - - 763,090 Debt Service Levies Total 3,230,000 3,471,700 5,377,639 CONSTRUCTION FUND LEVIES Capital Improvement Plan Levy 2,000,000 2,000,000 1,900,000 Equipment Levy 2,350,000 2,470,000 3,010,000 Street Special Levy 1,210,400 1,481,000 1,762,000 Special Park Improvement Levy 1,000,000 1,000,000 400,000 Construction Levies Total 6,560,400 6,951,000 7,072,000 HRA Fund Levies HRA Operating Levy 244,400 251,700 259,300 TOTAL PROPERTY TAX LEVIED 49,855,000$ 54,418,565$ 61,567,154$ Increase from Prior Year 9.89%9.15%13.14% *Community Health & Safety Center & PS 5.46% Page 1036 of 1086 2025 Estimated Levy Impacts •In 2024 the median valued home (MVH) pays about $177 per month in property taxes •Total Estimated Market Value (EMV) increased by about 3.7% for taxes payable in 2025. The MVH is now $ 712,300. •In 2025 the median valued home (MVH) pays about $200.81 per year in property taxes to fund all City provided services (increase $23.81/month) Page 1037 of 1086 Next Steps •Certify Final Tax Levy 12/17/2024 Page 1038 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 9.7 Prepared By: Perry Vetter, Parks & Recreation Director Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Parks & Recreation Item Title: Approve 2025 Edina Historical Society Service Agreement Action Requested: Approve the 2025 Edina Historical Society Service Agreement. Information/Background: Annually the City funds the Edina Historical Society (EHS) to provide services including: 1. Archiving records and materials that would otherwise be eliminated to comply with the MN Government Data Practices Act. EHS has no role in the Data Practices Act and is not a custodian of City of Edina records. 2. Archiving catalogs and preserve acquisitions into the historical collection. 3. Providing exhibits and speaker programs to the public. 4. Providing images, research materials and historical information to City staff for use in City publications and videos. Below has been added in 2025. 5. EHS will amend their by-laws to allow the Edina City Council to appoint two non-voting student members and one regular voting member/liaison as part of the annual commission application and appointment process. 6. Implement the Strategy and Operational Plan dated September 2024 and provide to the City Council an annual report with metrics. 7. EHS will consult with city staff on integrating the City’s values of equity, engagement, sustainability, stewardship, and health into decision-making. 8. Include City staff as part of the interview team for the EHS executive director position. The City Council discussed the status and proposal from the Edina Historical Society on Feb. 20, 2024 and Sept. 17, 2024 during scheduled Work Session meetings. The City's funding level was increased in prior years from $15,000 in 2023 to $20,000 in 2024. The funding level is $100,000 in 2025. Resources/Financial Impacts: • Budget – Staff could make one-time adjustment for 2025 proposal. Would need to levy for increased amount in 2026. • Implementation – The Edina Historical Society will implement. • Operation – The Edina Historical Society will operate. Relationship to City Policies: Established in 1969, the Edina Historical Society was formed. The Society, a 501c3 designated non- Page 1039 of 1086 profit organization, has a mission, “To Collect, Preserve and Tell Edina’s Story” to the community and beyond. Per State Statute, the City has authority to fund a local historical society if the use of funds meets the criteria provided in statute. Supporting Documentation: 1. 2025 Edina Historical Society Service Agreement 2. City Council Mtg - Edina Historical Society Presentation Slides Page 1040 of 1086 Page 1 of 3 Service Agreement Between the City of Edina & Edina Historical Society An agreement made this ___ day of December 2024 by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”) and EDINA HISTORICAL SOCIETY (“Service Provider”). AUTHORITY Established in 1969, the Edina Historical Society was formed. The Society, a 501c3 designated non-profit organization, has a mission, “To Collect, Preserve and Tell Edina’s Story” to the community and beyond. Per State Statute, the City has authority to fund a local historical society if the use of funds meets the criteria provided in statute. State Statute 471.93 APPROPRIATIONS FOR HISTORICAL WORK BY MUNICIPALITIES. In cities of the second, third or fourth class, and statutory cities at any regular or properly called special meeting of the Council, it may appropriate money for the purpose of collecting, preserving, storing, housing, printing, publishing, distributing and exhibiting data and material pertaining to the history of the city, for the purpose of commemorating the anniversary of any important and outstanding event in such history, and to preserve such history data and material for future generations. 138.053 COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY; TAX LEVY; CITIES OR TOWNS. The governing body of any home rule charter or statutory city or town may annually appropriate from its general fund an amount not to exceed 0.02418 percent of estimated market value, derived from ad valorem taxes on property or other revenues, to be paid to the historical society of its respective city, town, or county to be used for the promotion of historical work and to aid in defraying the expenses of carrying on the historical work in the city, town, or county. No city or town may appropriate any funds for the benefit of any historical society unless the society is affiliated with and approved by the Minnesota Historical Society. AGREEMENT The following conditions establish the relationship between the City of Edina (City) and the Edina Historical Society (EHS): 1. Annual funding provided to EHS by the City will be issued in the first quarter of the calendar year. a. M.S. 471.93 and 138.053 authorizes the City to appropriate money and make expenditures for the specified purposes. b. The City Council has final authority to increase, decrease or eliminate the funding provided to the EHS on an annual basis. c. EHS can request an increase in funds in writing on a bi-annual basis (odd years) i. Written request should be submitted to the City’s staff liaison by May 1 ii. Written request should include: 1. Organization status, location, board members, service provided. 2. Amount requested. 3. Service provided or enhanced by funding amount. 4. Financial/Annual Report. d. Written request will be submitted to the City Council during the budget-cycle. e. The annual funding for 2025 Fiscal Year is set at $100,000. Page 1041 of 1086 Page 2 of 3 2. The Edina City Council shall have the right to appoint up to three (3) board members to the Edina Historical Society Board. a. Two (2) appointments shall be non-voting student members, and one (1) appointment shall be a voting member serving as the City liaison to the EHS. b. Student member appointments shall be one-year terms based upon the academic school year calendar of September to August. c. Regular member appointment shall be a three-year term, with a maximum of two-terms from March to February. City Council appointments shall follow City of Edina practices and procedures. d. EHS shall review and amend by-laws as needed to fulfill this obligation. 3. The EHS provides services to the City, including: a. Archives records and materials that would otherwise be eliminated to comply with the MN Government Data Practices Act. b. Archive catalogs and preserve acquisitions into the historical collection. c. Provide exhibits and speakers programs to the public. d. Provide images, research materials and historical information to City staff for use in City publications and videos at no cost. e. Implement Strategy and Operational Plan September 2024 dated August 28, 2024, and provide to the City Council an annual report with metrics. 4. Facility rentals for Arneson Acres Terrace Room and outdoor park area shall be coordinated by the City. The City will reserve the facility in the following priority order: a. First - scheduling for City programming. b. Second - scheduling for EHS programming. EHS will not be charged for their use of Arneson Acres Terrace Room and outdoor park area. c. Third - scheduling for the general private use by the public. d. The EHS and the City shall develop a schedule of use for Arneson Acres Terrace Room and outdoor park area for EHS programming prior to releasing time to the public. 5. Facility rentals for Cahill School and Grange Hall shall be coordinated by EHS. EHS will reserve the facility in the following priority order: a. First - scheduling for EHS programming. EHS will not be charged for their use of Cahill School and Grange Hall. b. Second - scheduling for City programming. c. Third - scheduling for public use. EHS cannot sub-lease or charge for private use. d. The EHS and the City shall develop a schedule of use as needed. 6. The City reserves the right to modify insurance requirements. EHS insurance policies shall be primary with respect to any claim arising out of the agreement. EHS shall purchase and maintain for the duration of the agreement the following minimum coverages: a. Commercial General Liability insurance with limits of at least $1,000,000 for each occurrence. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, products- completed operations, personal & advertising injury, and contractually assumed liability. The City shall be endorsed as additional insured. EHS shall provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance as evidence of coverage. b. EHS is responsible for determination of other appropriate insurance and limits and necessary coverage such as Employer’s Liability Insurance, Automotive Insurance, and Property/Contents Insurance. Page 1042 of 1086 Page 3 of 3 7. Maintenance and cleaning requests for EHS space at Arneson Acres, Cahill School and Grange Hall shall be reported to the City staff liaison for submission as a work order to the City’s Facility Division for response. The staff liaison will submit requests so they can be tracked for status. Prior to the regularly scheduled EHS board meetings, the staff liaison will provide an update on the submitted work orders to provide additional information on the status of any requests. Requests outside of routine maintenance and cleaning will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and charged to EHS accordingly. 8. The City IT Department will offer certain technology support hardware, internet, phone and networking capabilities at Arneson Acres based on the IT Support Options Memo. 9. Programming coordination for joint ideas on mutually agreed upon topics and events shall be coordinated by the assigned City staff liaison. a. EHS will consult with city staff on integrating the City’s values of equity, engagement, sustainability, stewardship, and health into decision-making. b. EHS will collaborate with the City of Edina to update the signage at Cahill School and Grange Hall. c. City staff will be included as part of the interview team for the executive director position to ensure the City’s interests are represented throughout the selection process. 10. General Conditions a. EHS agrees that it will comply with all federal, state and local statutes and ordinances relating to nondiscrimination. b. EHS shall always be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of the City for any purpose. c. All data created, collected, received, maintained, or disseminated for any purpose during this Agreement is governed by the MN Government Data Practices Act, M.S. Ch. 13, any other applicable state statute, or any state rules adopted to implement the act, as well as federal regulations on data privacy. d. All books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the EHS and its (sub) contractor(s), if any, relative to this agreement are subject to examination by the City. City of Edina Edina Historical Society By: _____________________ By: ______________________ (Mayor) (Chair) By: _____________________ By: ______________________ (City Manager) Date: ___________________ Date: _____________________ Page 1043 of 1086 EdinaMN.gov Edina Historical Society City Council Meeting December 17, 2024 Page 1044 of 1086 Edina Historical Society Relationship •Established in 1969 as a 501c3 •Formed by the City of Edina and several residents to save the Historic Cahill School building and provide history-themed programs •The Society’s mission is “To Collect, Preserve and Tell Edina’s Story” to the community and beyond •Operating out of the City owned Arneson Acres Park building and programming two additional city buildings, the Cahill School and the Grange Building Page 1045 of 1086 Edina Historical Society Relationship •The City provides $20,000 in operational funding annually (FY 2024) •The Society is eligible for and has received Legacy Grants from the State of Minnesota Historical Society •The Historical Society provides the following services to the City: •Archive records and materials that would otherwise be eliminated to comply with the MN Data Practices Act•Archive catalogs and preserve acquisitions into the historical collection•Provide exhibits and speaker programs to the public•Provide research materials and historical information Page 1046 of 1086 Edina Historical Society Previously Reviewed Options Status Quo City Absorbs EHS Increased Financial Support Page 1047 of 1086 Edina Historical Society Relationship After an initial discussion on Feb. 20, 2024,the EHS Board completed and submitted a Strategy and Operational Plan. That submittal was reviewed with the City Council on Sept. 17, 2024. That plan includes: •Vision •Mission •Strategy •Operating Plan •Evaluation and Monitoring •Situational Analysis •2025 –2027 Proforma Council feedback led to the preparation of this agreement for 2025 Page 1048 of 1086 Edina Historical Society Relationship •Grant $20k to the EHS for Service Provider contractual services in 2024 •Levy $80k annually starting for FY 2025 •Total of $100k in FY 2025 •Maintain $100,000 through FY2027 with annual agreement approval required •Maintains 501c (3) status of EHS Page 1049 of 1086 Edina Historical Society Relationship New for 2025 will include: 1.EHS will amend their by-laws to allow the Edina City Council to appoint two non-voting student members and one regular voting member/liaison as part of the annual commission application and appointment process. 2.Implement the Strategy and Operational Plan dated September 2024 and provide to the City Council an annual report with metrics. 3.EHS will consult with city staff on integrating the City’s values of equity, engagement, sustainability, stewardship, and health into decision-making. 4.Include City staff as part of the interview team for the EHS executive director position. Requested Action: Approve 2025 Edina Historical Society Agreement Page 1050 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Information Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 10.1 Prepared By: Zoe Johnson, City Management Fellow, Thomas Brooks, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Manager Item Type: Minutes Department: Administration Item Title: Minutes: Human Rights and Relations Commission, October 16, 2024 Action Requested: None. Information/Background: Receive the Oct. 16, 2024, minutes. Supporting Documentation: 1. Minutes: October 16, 2024 Page 1051 of 1086 MINUTES OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS & RELATIONS COMMISSION Regular Meeting 7:00 PM WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2024 Meeting location: Edina City Hall Community Room 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 1. Call to Order 7:04pm Chair calls to order 2. Roll Call Commissioners Khalifa, Stone, Nelson, Rogers, and Kumar were present. Commissioners Ismail, Stringer Moore, and Doscotch arrived late, at 7:12pm, 7:20pm, and 7:30pm respectively. Commissioners Park and Dawkins were absent. 3. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion to approve tonight's meeting agenda by Commissioner Nelson. Motion seconded by Commissioner Stone. Motion carries. 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes 4.1. Minutes from September 18, 2024 Motion to approve the meeting minutes from September's HRRC meeting by Commissioner Nelson. Motion seconded by Commissioner Stringer-Moore. Motion carries. 5. Community Comment None. 6. Reports/Recommendations 6.1. 2024 Work Plan Updates Sharing Values, Sharing Communities Event from Commissioner Nelson • Event was featured on page two in an article in the Sun Current newspaper today (10/16). • Posters/flyers have been and continue to be passed around in the community. o Discussion around HRRC commissioners getting more posters around Edina businesses and gathering spaces. • Minnesota Pride Rotary club, faith-based groups, Anti-Racism Collective, and personal connections have reached out to voice their support of the event. • A survey will be ready to learn what attendees thought of the event. Page 1052 of 1086 • Special guests will be introduced, but not explicitly highlighted in event handout, and they are: o Jack Baker and Mike McConnell o Transparenthood's founder Leslie Lagerstrom Tom Oye Award • Reopened this award nomination window (new cutoff midnight on 10/16) and ultimately received 4 additional applications. o Now at 10 nominations after final deadline extension and one last communications push. • Staff will get these nominations to the commission in November. Bias and Discrimination Event Response • Staff have reworked the process internally to be more responsive. o Now called Bias Event Response Plan. o Staff continued to give an overview of how the process works and reiterated the importance of having the process written down. • Discussion on ensuring keywords (racist, sexist, etc.) are included in cross- references of the form to ensure those who have experienced an incident can more easily find the form and begin working through the process. o Speaks to meeting people where they are. 6.2. 2025 Work Plan Discussion ESAP • Staff gave update to confirm that Council approved the request for purchase on partnering with consultant to help create the Equity Strategic Action Plan (ESAP). o This ESAP is the first the City has done - it is focused on about two large city priorities (not yet identified) and moving the needle on them in a 3-5 year time frame through phases. ▪ Goals and milestones will be communicated clearly for action. • City is working with Culture Brokers for ESAP. o Culture Brokers will work with staff, residents, and community stakeholders to complete their engagement work. ▪ One output of this engagement will be a Diamond Inclusiveness Assessment, or DIA. • Staff will continue to provide dates and updates on this process. Engagement Structures • Staff will be surveying B/C members to ask them about strategies they used for engagement with the community and what worked and didn't work. o Survey will be the first step to move forward and bring insight to where we need to look for creativity and where we might have existing reliable engagement structures. Staff will ensure City is inclusive and transparent as we move through this work plan item to uphold more community values. Page 1053 of 1086 • Staff will present the 2025 work plan for HRRC at a follow-up meeting with Admin. in November. o After this meeting takes place, staff will have more information for commission on next steps. • Staff is asking for input on future task force charter model to ensure we all move forward with the same vision for what this should look like. o This will be a pilot to try to be more intentionally inclusive and transparent in ways less formal and commitment-based. o As the commission moves to a task force, the commission's work plan will become the task force's work plan for 2025. • Task force conversations need to include future plans for HRRC and what it should look like moving forward. 7. Chair and Member Comments Commissioner Nelson reiterated that commissioner attendance is important for the Sharing Values, Sharing Communities event on October 22, and stressed the need for more word of mouth for the event to the community. Commissioner Stone discussed restraints commissions have on advocacy work and attendance for participation, and asked about the relevancy this holds in other communities. Staff affirmed that is a difficult piece for all communities to address. 8. Staff Comments 8.1. Staff Updates Staff gave the following updates: • The 2025 Juneteenth event will be facilitated in partnership with Jessica Conners, Edina PD's JCPP staff. o Thomas and Jessica are staff to reach out to if you are interested in assisting with planning the event. o The Anti-Racism Collective is looking to be part of this planning process, as well. • Updates to the City's purchasing policy are complete - this ensures city leaders from various departments are centering the City's values while making large purchases to better poise them to consider the organization's commitment to equity, health, stewardship, engagement, and sustainability. • DEI learning for all staff will be implemented soon - this training will be mandatory for all staff to ensure individual staff take ownership of their part to foster diversity, equity, and inclusion, as they are organizational values and should never rest solely on the DEI manager. 9. Adjournment Moved to adjourn by Commissioner Stringer Moore. Seconded by Commissioner Nelson. Motion carries. Meeting adjourns at 8:22pm. Page 1054 of 1086 d ITEM REPORT Date: December 17, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: City Council Agenda Number: 11.1 Prepared By: Scott Neal, City Manager Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Administration Item Title: Adopt Revised 2025 Legislative Platforms Action Requested: Adopt both legislative platforms as amended for 2025's legislative session. Information/Background: After the Work Session this evening, further input from Council members was received on the drafted legislative items that received prior feedback from Council. After discussing the legislative positions and priorities that received prior feedback, the Council directed city staff to amend the drafted platforms to prepare for full adoption of both platforms tonight. Both platforms have been amended with Council's final input, and the Council has received printed copies of both platforms with all revised information included. The drafted platforms available online were added prior to the Council's Work Session this evening, but for full adoption this evening, Council will be approving the final versions of both platforms that have been printed out and dispersed to the Council prior to this evening's Council meeting. The identification of state laws that might be changed to better achieve the goals of the City and the broader Edina community is something that occurs each year. In the same vein, as City staff work with colleagues and partners to identify these state laws, they also work to propose changes to said state laws that may be working contrary to City goals - ultimately limiting the livelihood and progress of the broader Edina community. While legislative sessions occur each year, changes to state laws can take years to occur. Issues are debated, modified, and could still be unsuccessful - this is why it is crucial to start the conversation early with the understanding that details will be fine-tuned throughout the legislative process. As the City continues to flush out the specifics within our 2025 State Legislative Platform, so do associations such as Municipal Legislative Commission (MLC), Metro Cities (Association of Metropolitan Municipalities), and the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC). Oftentimes, Edina's interests align with these associations both by virtue of the City's participation in each association as well as their guiding purpose. The City's 2025 State Legislative Platform does not duplicate items found in MLC, Metro Cities, or LMC platforms, but it does assume general alignment with these partner associations. As these associations finalize their platforms, staff will continue to address the need for small updates and/or major changes to maintain proper issue alignment. This staff report corresponds with the City's drafted 2025 State Legislative Platform, which addresses concerns that may be considered in the 2025 state legislative session, beginning January 14, 2025. The two types of items that make up the legislative platform are priorities and positions. Priorities are issues specific to Edina and do not directly affect other communities. Positions are issues affecting cities in general and are not specific to Edina. Resources/Financial Impacts: None. Page 1055 of 1086 Relationship to City Policies: There are a variety of city policies and plans that relate to these legislative platforms, such as the CAP, CIP, work plans, etc. Supporting Documentation: 1. DRAFT 2025 Federal Legislative Platform_20241217 work session 2. DRAFT 2025 State Legislative Platform_20241217 work session 3. Council Feedback on 2025 Legislative Platforms_work session 20241217 Page 1056 of 1086 December 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council Scott H. Neal, City Manager Zoe Johnson, City Management Fellow DRAFT 2025 Federal Legislative Platform 1 Affordable Housing Supplying affordable housing to all Minnesotans is an important investment to make in the state’s future. Unfortunately, the funding available falls far short of what is needed. Cities cannot close the housing affordability gap on their own. The City urges Congress to increase the allocation to Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), prioritize affordable housing and work with local partners to coordinate federal housing resources. The City asks Congress to reduce the bond threshold from 50 percent to 25 percent of eligible costs for LIHTC, allowing the tax-exempt bonds to leverage more credit across projects. This would result in leveraging more private equity in affordable housing to create up to twice as many units, thus greatly reducing the housing shortage. The City urges Congress to increase support for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership (HOME) programs. These programs are the principal source of federal revenue for localities to use in developing and implementing community development solutions, such as affordable housing, that create and sustain healthy, functioning communities. Additionally, in 2023 the State of Minnesota recognized a “right to heating” in winter to protect the comfort, safety, and well-being of renters and low-income Minnesotans, along with additional tenant protections. The City urges Congress to adopt similar standards nationwide, including rights to both heating and to cooling, along with additional funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). Bills such as the Heating and Cooling Relief Act (S.405/H.R.893) not only would allow LIHEAP to assist more households but also reduce both utility bills and building emissions via expanded weatherization programs. Page 1057 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 2 2 Climate Change The City approved its Climate Action Plan in December 2021, setting a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 45 percent by 2030. The plan includes 200 actions to meet our climate action goals, and the City has already started or completed over 30 percent of these critical actions and has benefitted from federal legislation and funding. For example, the City received a $200,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All program to create a consolidated safe and equitable transportation plan, combining existing pedestrian and bike master plans and new plans, like a roadway safety plan. Goals of this plan will include reductions in vehicle miles traveled and increased multi-modal transit ridership and service. While the City continues to lead local climate change efforts, federal assistance helps us meet our goals more quickly and efficiently, particularly those concerning transportation and the greenhouse gas effects of the transportation industry. First, we ask for increased investment in high-speed passenger rail in the Midwest. The Twin Cities were prioritized for more frequent service to Chicago, and the City is eager to keep this prioritization, but we also seek high-speed rail connections to reduce short-haul flights in the Midwest. The City applauds the $500,000 of federal funding allocated to the planning of the Northern Lights Express project, and look forward to continued investment in the Midwest’s passenger rail network. Second, we ask for the creation of a national e-bike rebate or tax credit program, such as one similar to the Inflation Reduction Act’s electric vehicle (EV) credits. Minnesota’s program opened in July 2024 and there was such a high demand that the website crashed. Higher levels of investment are needed than current state funding. Such programs allow greater access to climate-friendly transportation, and e-bikes have positive health benefits. Third, we ask for support for transit system operations, like the Stronger Communities Through Better Transit Act (H.R.7039). Edina seeks to double its transit ridership by 2030, and operations funding can help Metro Transit increase service to suburban communities, increasing access, and increasing ridership opportunities. Finally, we ask that Congress declare a climate emergency. This recognition would open up additional sources of funding and mobilization of resources that would empower federal, state, and local governments to better prepare for and mitigate the consequences of climate change. 3 Enable Cities to Protect Residents from Harmful Levels of Aviation Noise The City identified aviation noise as a key threat to the quality of life in Edina. The City requests support from Edina’s federally elected officials for eliminating Categorical Exclusions (CATEX) when implementing Performance Based Navigation (PBN). The process should ensure that ground impacts and community concerns are incorporated into PBN that will change noise exposure. Regarding measuring noise, Day/Night Noise Level (DNL) is an average and humans perceive noise as individual events, rather than averages, so we believe it is time to investigate alternative metrics. Page 1058 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 3 The City is concerned about the impacts from the increased number and frequency of flights under traditional PBN tracks. There is currently very little information pertaining to the human impact of the concentration of flights associated with PBN procedures. Our residents are exposed to continuous concentrated noise due to our proximity to the airport. Although there may not be an increase in average noise as measured by DNL, there are unknown impacts from the increased number and frequency of flights. Given the age of some Sound Insulation Programs (SIP) in the United States, the increase in traffic density at our nation’s airports and improved technologies, the Edina City Council supports the eligibility standards used prior to the September 2012 Program Guidance Letter (PGL-12-09). The Edina City Council opposes the privatization of Air Traffic Control. We are concerned it may reduce the accountability of the organization to Congress, and that without a mechanism for compelling private companies to meet and discuss community concerns, there will be fewer opportunities for advocacy on noise impacts. The FAA has taken positive steps to improve community engagement, including adopting a Community Involvement Manual and hiring a Community Involvement Manager for Airspace Projects. The Edina City Council believes that this will result in a more efficient and successful implementation of NextGen, and we strongly support these efforts. 4 Post Office Preservation The Edina Post Office in the 50th & France District, at 3948 Market Street, is housed in a leased facility. The Edina Post Office is important to the Edina, Minneapolis and St. Louis Park residents it serves. We ask your support in keeping a full-service post office in the 50th & France District and to initiate the planning process for a new post office within the next 24 months. 5 Protection of Municipal Bonds The City’s Aaa and AAA credit ratings from Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s Investors Services are a source of community pride and represent the financial strength of our city. These ratings create opportunities for the City to invest in our community’s future and provide the best value in public services back to our residents. It is the combination of local control and local responsibility that makes municipal bonds such an effective and efficient tool. Any changes to the tax code should recognize the vital role of tax-except municipal bonds. The City asks you to oppose any attempt to make changes to the tax-exempt status that would increase the cost of financing for cities as doing so would impact our operations, our services and, ultimately, our residents. 6 Railroad Safety The City has one railroad that runs through the center of Edina, with two trains running daily on the tracks, and there are numerous other tracks within a 10-mile radius. The City supports legislation to mitigate negative safety concerns, noise, and environmental impacts of railroads and to increase communications with first responders for municipal emergency response to non-rail incidents and rail incidents. Such legislation includes the Railway Safety Act of 2023 (S.576). These measures are needed as the number and length of trains in the state and metro area are increasing, and as recent derailments, such as the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) train derailment in Raymond, Minnesota, highlight the risk that rail poses to communities. Page 1059 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 4 Rail is an essential part of the national economy and reduces impacts on other infrastructure, so it must be maintained and operated safely in communities. 7 Public Safety The City operates a police department that includes sworn peace officers, a 911 dispatch division and community engagement functions. As with many communities in the Twin Cities, recruitment and retention of police officers, violent crime, and fentanyl overdoses remain enduring issues. The City supports initiatives like Community Violence Intervention (CVI) programs and the Safer America Plan. These proactive strategies are making a tangible difference in community safety across the nation, through their focus on neighborhood safety, intervention and support before violent crimes take place, and recruiting and retaining skilled and dedicated police officers. The City urges continued support of programs like these, through the Congressional action laid out in the Safer America Plan. Page 1060 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 5 City of Edina Staff Contact Information Scott Neal, City Manager, can be contacted regarding any of the legislative items, in addition to the staff below. He can be reached at SNeal@EdinaMN.gov or 952-826-0401. 1 Affordable Housing Stephanie Hawkinson, Affordable Housing Development Manager SHawkinson@EdinaMN.gov 952-833-9578 2 Climate Change Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager MBayer@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-1621 3 Enable Cities to Protect Residents from Harmful Levels of Aviation Noise Scott Neal, City Manager SNeal@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0401 4 Post Office Preservation Scott Neal, City Manager SNeal@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0401 5 Protection of Municipal Bonds Pa Thao, Director of Finance PThao@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0420 6 Railroad Safety Chad Millner, Director of Engineering CMillner@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0318 7 Public Safety Todd Milburn, Chief of Police TMilburn@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0487 Page 1061 of 1086 December 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council Scott H. Neal, City Manager Zoe Johnson, City Management Fellow DRAFT 2025 State Legislative Platform Priorities: The following seven priorities are made up of issues specific to Edina and do not directly affect other communities. 1 Expansion of Local Sales Tax Spending Plan The City of Edina seeks local authority to spend revenue collected under its current voter-approved local sales tax for the full nineteen-year period for which it is authorized on capital improvements on parks & recreation projects that serve a regional population. Proposals to spend these funds will be submitted to voter approval during a regularly scheduled local election. This proposal does not increase the term of the sales tax beyond its current nineteen-year term. This proposal does not increase the rate of the current local sales tax. This proposal does not increase the scope of applicability of the current local sales tax. 2 Bonding for Interchange Improvements at Minnesota Highway 100 and Vernon Avenue/West 50th Street The Minnesota Highway 100 interchange is non-standard with eight local road connections. The City partnered with Hennepin County to improve this interchange, helping to reduce construction impacts and cost. More importantly, the result will be a safer interchange for all users, by consolidating access points and increasing pedestrian paths and creating a more connected Grandview district. Edina’s share of the total project cost is estimated to be $15.47 million; the City is requesting $5.3 million from the state, to match the local funds allocated for the project. In addition, the City requests that the State designates the surplus land created by the project for expansion of the municipal campus including a much needed third fire station in northeast Edina. 3 Bonding for the Aquatic Center The Edina Aquatic Center is requesting state bonding to replace critical infrastructure in the facility’s pool pump house. Total cost for the project is $10.5 million. The pool house was originally constructed in 1958, Page 1062 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 2 and it needs replacement to accommodate changes in state code related to pumping apparatus, filter requirements and surge tank reservoirs to address swimmer capacity displacement. The Aquatic Center is a popular regional destination, with 75% of its annual visitors coming from outside of Edina, and an average of 850 to 1,000 visitors per day. Bonding would provide for a modern, code-compliant pool house, along with augmented pool amenities and patron areas to ensure a safe visitor experience. 4 Sales Tax Exemption for Projects in the Braemar Park Master Plan and Fred Richards Park Master Plan The City will use new local sales and use tax revenue to make improvements and expansions to Braemar Arena and Braemar Park and Fred Richards Park, as outlined in the Braemar Park Master Plan and Fred Richards Park Master Plan. The City will seek a sales tax exemption for the material and supplies purchased for the construction, reconstruction, upgrade, expansion, or remodeling of City facilities included in the Braemar Park Master Plan and the Fred Richards Park Master Plan. 5 Funding Support for Entrepreneurs and Second-Stage Businesses The City of Edina is pursuing direct funding from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development and/or Veterans Affairs to support the Edina Chamber of Commerce and BIG/Edina Business Innovation Lab to support ongoing support of entrepreneurs and second-stage businesses. Supporting a three-to-five-year funding commitment at $200,000 annually would allow these organizations to serve more clients and pursue higher levels of economic growth. 6 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Legislation for 70th and France and 72nd and France #2 The City approved the 70th and France and 72nd and France #2 TIF Districts in 2022 and 2023 respectively to encourage reinvestment and redevelopment of substandard commercial properties. After considerable discussion, the City also entered into TIF redevelopment agreements with each development team to provide TIF funding subject to project completion and delivery of proposed public benefits. The City requests an extension of the five-year rule to 10 years. In addition, the City requests the ability to extend the terms of each TIF agreement, subject to approval by Edina City Council. When these Districts were established, the developers were on pace to redevelop the sites with new commercial and multi-family housing buildings and the existing buildings were demolished. Since the Districts were established and the substandard buildings removed, the national economic climate has changed significantly. Costs of construction material and labor have increased. Interest rates have increased. The ability of private banks to finance office buildings has decreased. The availability of private equity has also decreased. This situation is forecasted to see a slow recovery beginning in 2025. Unfortunately, this pause in private financing hinders the ability of both redevelopment projects to succeed. The ‘five-year rule’ in Minnesota TIF statutes will likely disqualify these sites from the use of TIF at the level needed for success. Without the pledge of TIF to fill the financial gap, neither of these projects will reach their potential. The City requests an extension of the five-year rule to 10 years to allow the private lending sector to return to normal. In addition, the City requests the ability to extend the terms of each TIF agreement, subject to approval by Edina City Council. This would increase the 15-year term of the 70th and France District to 25 years and the 25-year term of the 72nd and France #2 District to 30 years. Page 1063 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 3 7 Protect Municipal Employees with Enforcement Functions Many city employees and contractors are required to enforce administrative codes, rules, ordinances, and state laws as part of their job duties. Minnesota law recognizes the need to protect certain employees whose jobs make it more likely they will be the target of assaults by escalating assault charges from fifth to fourth degree for the assaults of peace officers, firefighters, school officials, and “public employees with mandated duties.” However, employees such as code enforcement officials, utility operators, municipal liquor store clerks and others have similar enforcement functions. The City supports extending the existing protection to all public employees whose jobs require them to enforce administrative codes, rules, ordinances, and state laws as a part of their job because: Due to the enforcement function of their jobs, these public employees can be and have been subject to verbal assaults, threats, and physical violence. This would more evenly apply the law to all employees more likely to become target of assaults. Positions: The following legislative positions are grouped into five categories: General Government (page 3-7), Affordable Housing (8-9), Environment and Sustainability (9-12), Transportation (12-13) and Public Safety (13-16). These positions represent issues which apply to Edina and other Minnesota cities. 1 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 1.1 Realign Motor Vehicle Lease Sales Tax Allocation In 2015, state legislation reallocated $32 million of the sales tax collected from leased vehicles from the State's general fund, half to Greater Minnesota and half to metro counties through the County State Aid Highway Fund. To balance funding for transit and roads/bridges, the new law excluded Hennepin and Ramsey Counties from receiving their share of funding. Instead, the other five metro counties split the proceeds generated in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties. With the elimination of the Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB) in 2017, all seven metro counties now collect their own local transportation sale tax, but the exemption still blocks Hennepin and Ramsey Counties. The City of Edina advocates for returning to the original intent by eliminating the exemption of Hennepin and Ramsey Counties and distributing the sales tax on lease vehicles, per the county state aid formula, to all metro counties. The City supports re-aligning the distribution because: •Distributing Hennepin and Ramsey County proceeds to the other five metro counties puts cities in Hennepin County at a disadvantage when it comes to accessing county funds for road and bridge projects. •This change would provide an estimated $10.7 million in additional funding to Hennepin County for roads and bridges. 1.2 Increase Purchasing Agency The City Manager is the chief purchasing agent of statutory Plan B cities. State law requires the City Manager to recommend purchases and contracts and requires additional approval by the City Council. There are only 18 Statutory Plan B Cities in MN. •In Edina, this approval is obtained through Requests for Purchase on the Consent agenda. Page 1064 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 4 •The $20,000 statutory threshold has not been raised since 2004. This does not account for standard inflation over the past 20 years. •The costs of items has significantly increased, most City purchases are well over $20,000. Allowing the City Manager a higher purchasing threshold can make purchasing more efficient, while still maintaining compliance and oversight of budget. •Neighboring charter cities with the Council-Manager form of Government, have significantly higher limits (St. Louis Park, Minnetonka, Richfield, Bloomington, Minneapolis, Hopkins) all have $175,000 thresholds. •The City of Edina supports a raise in legal maximum to at least $175,000 (consistent with MN Statute 471.345) with the ability for individual City Councils to set lower thresholds at their discretion. 1.3 Adult-Use Cannabis Legislation during the 2023 session legalized adult-use cannabis and established regulatory authority in the new Office of Cannabis management. The City supports further clarification on the opportunity to operate a municipal cannabis retail store because: •Local governments should have the option to establish municipal dispensaries in the model of municipal retail liquor stores, as both operations have primary goals of ensuring the safety and security of the community. •The City also seeks clarification on buffer distancing from “an attraction within a public park that is regularly used by minors, including a playground or athletic field”. The current language is confusing, hard to administer and opens municipalities up to lawsuits over interpretation. For instance, where would you calculate a buffer requirement for a baseball field with no back fencing? Standard parcel boundaries are easy to measure and allow easier mapping for potential cannabis retail operations. 1.4 Hearing Aid Affordability Currently, hearing aids are not classified as durable medical equipment (DME) and therefore not covered under many health insurance plans. Without health insurance coverage, many who need hearing aids are unable to get them, as they cost three to six thousand dollars. The City supports programs or policy changes reducing the cost of hearing aids and increasing access to them because: •Hearing aids are critical devices for those who are deaf or hard of hearing. •Without health insurance coverage, hearing aids are not affordable for those living on a fixed income. Both Edina seniors on a fixed income and youth who age out of hearing aid support cannot access hearing aids because of cost. •Cochlear implants, which cost $80,000 to $120,000, are typically covered by health insurance while hearing aids are not. 1.5 Allow Restrictions on Possession of Firearms in Municipal Facilities with School-Like Use The Minnesota Citizens Personal Protection Act, also known as “conceal-and carry,” prohibits guns on most school properties but forbids other local units of government from prohibiting loaded firearms on their properties. The inconsistencies in the law’s treatment of different kinds of properties have caused confusion about how the law applies to multi-use facilities, such as municipal ice arenas used for school-sponsored programs. While various public facilities can restrict firearm possession, including schools, public facilities with a school-like function are not granted this authority. The City has several facilities with school-like Page 1065 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 5 usage and a large population of school-aged users. The City supports clarifying the law to allow municipal facilities with school-like usage to restrict the possession of firearms inside their facilities because: •This would align the law with other facilities that are authorized to restrict possession. •This would be one step to securing the safety of those who use City facilities for a school-like function. 1.6 Remove Language in the State Constitution Allowing for Enslavement of Incarcerated People The Minnesota Constitution states that “There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the state otherwise than as punishment for a crime of which the party has been convicted.” The City urges removal of this language because: •This is immoral and out of step with Minnesota values. As a public entity, it’s incumbent on public officials to hold the state accountable to remove this language and its consequences. •There is recent precedent for such an action, with Colorado, Nebraska, Utah, Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee, and Vermont striking similar language from their constitutions. 1.7 Empower Unbanked Minnesotans to Participate in the Local Economy The City of Edina would support legislation that requires certain businesses, such as food stores, to accept cash payments, similar to bill SF4419 introduced in the 93rd legislative session. With the increase in businesses refusing to accept cash for payment in recent years, more unbanked Minnesotans are prevented from participating in the local economy or purchasing necessities such as groceries and hygiene products. 1.8 Data Practices and Personal Information The purpose of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) is to provide open and transparent information to the public, while protecting personal information from indiscriminate disclosure. The City supports mechanisms to define and regulate reasonable data requests, and charges that better reflect the actual costs of responding to data requests due to increases in data requests and increased staff time required for repetitive, broad and far-reaching requests. •Cities are experiencing increases in repetitive, overly broad, and far-reaching data requests. •These requests require significant staff time to locate government records, redact private data or data unrelated to the request, and assemble documents to be provided in order to comply with requirements to provide access to public government data. 1.9 Various Election Administration Support The City supports greater resources to assist in various aspects of election administration in local governments. •Supporting accessibility to voters who face barriers to voting. •Supporting technical/administrative improvements – some changes to timeline for campaign finance and procedure changes to the permanent absentee voting list. •Modernizing election judge responsibilities – allowing staff to perform signature matches for absentee ballots, language about emergency appointment of election judges for healthcare facilities. •Supporting RCV standards and equipment. •Supporting funding for elections through reimbursements from the state. Page 1066 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 6 •Supporting policies that protect and strengthen the security and safety of elections. 1.10 Change Group Home Regulation Licensed residential facilities do not have any distance separation requirements in single-family residential use zones in Edina. Minn. Stat. 245A.11 allows distance requirements of 1,320 feet between licensed residential facilities but limits the scope inequitably to cities in the first class. The City supports licensed residential facility use in the City and urges this distance separation requirements be applied fairly to all cities because: •Grouping multiple facilities on the same block in a single-family residential neighborhood creates substantial challenges to the neighborhood and reduces the community experience of individuals in the facilities. •Individuals no longer reap the benefit of enjoying a residential setting with a diversity of households. When entire blocks are acquired for licensed residential facilities, the setting is more similar to a large institutional campus. •Neighborhoods experience an increase in traffic, parking needs, deliveries, and other activities compounded by numerous facilities on the same block. •Grouping multiple facilities effectively turns a residential area into a commercial area. 1.11 Expansion for Collection of Park Dedication and Parks Dedication Fees The City of Edina supports an expansion to cities’ abilities to collect park dedication feeds related to the creation of new housing units. The existing city authority should be preserved by the legislature to maintain an ability to require parkland dedication and park dedication fees. The City supports an amendment to Minnesota statute 462.358 to allow all cities the option to require a reasonable portion of land or park dedication fee on new housing units and new commercial and industrial development without the requirement that land be subdivided. Municipal Liquor Positions 1.11-1.15 relate to municipal liquor. The City has operated a municipal liquor store since it was established by local referendum in 1948. The liquor operation generates over $1 million annually in profit. These profits fund Edina’s recreational facilities, including the ice arena, art center and aquatic center, allowing the City to reduce user fees and allow greater access. The City’s recreation programs serve children and families from all over the metro area, not just Edina. Continual support of liquor stores and their ability to generate profit allows municipal liquor stores to benefit the community and region through local programs and amenities. 1.12 Reinforce the Open Wholesaling Systems through Legislation In 2021, Miami-based Southern Glazer's Wine and Spirits filed a lawsuit against the State of Minnesota seeking elimination of a Minnesota law called the Coleman Act, which contains the open wholesaling system of spirits distribution. Open wholesaling of spirits requires that all spirit brands (with some exceptions) be available for sale to all licensed Minnesota wholesalers. This encourages healthy competition among wholesalers benefiting both sellers and customers. If Southern Glazer's lawsuit is successful, more than half of the spirit brands in Minnesota may become exclusive with Southern Glazer's. The City opposes this lawsuit and supports an amendment of the Coleman Act to reinforce a system of open wholesaling because without protections for open wholesaling: •Wholesale prices will increase. Page 1067 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 7 •Service levels on certain brands will decrease. •Purchase and delivery schedules will be reduced. •Sale margins will be compressed. 1.13 Oppose Further Changes to Tap Room Retail Operations Due to changes during the COVID-19 pandemic, tap rooms can offer limited direct-to-customer sales via carryout. These sales are controlled by quantity, and the product must use different packaging than the product supplied wholesale to liquor stores. The City opposes further changes to tap room retail operations because changes could allow bulk or exclusive sale from tap rooms jeopardizing the State of MN three- tiered system. 1.14 Protect Customer Data As a municipal operation, municipal liquor stores may be subject to data practices requests. The City supports protections for customer data because: •Customer data subject to request could include purchase history and personally identifying information. •The threat of data requests erodes trust with the customer. •It may put municipal liquor stores at a competitive disadvantage. •The City’s municipal liquor operation discontinued its customer rewards program, because without clarity of what information is subject to a data request, the City would not hold personally identifying information and purchase history that could be subject to a data request. 1.15 Clarity on THC-Infused Products With the passage of Minn. Stat. 151.72 in July 2022, products containing THC are permitted for sale. The City seeks clarification on if retail liquor stores can sell THC-infused beverages because: •Without federal passage of the SAFE banking act, cannabis-related legitimate operations cannot generate proceeds from unlawful activity, and banking institutions can be penalized by federal authorities for providing services to a cannabis-related business. •Current regulation allows for retailers like Edina Liquor to accept credit card payments only if the percent of total revenue from THC products is less than 15%. 1.16 Maintain Constraints on Off-Sale Liquor Currently, grocery and convenience stores can sell 3.2% alcohol, while all other alcohol products are sold at liquor stores. Some grocery stores opt to apply for an off-sale liquor license and can sell beer, wine and liquor at the store, with some adjustments, including a separate entrance. The City of Edina supports maintaining the constraints on off-sale liquor because: •The constraints allow for smaller private and municipal liquor stores to compete on an even playing field. •Claims that the off-sale liquor license process inhibits growth are rebutted by several grocery stores opting for some locations applying for the off-sale liquor license. Page 1068 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 8 2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING Affordable housing includes two focuses: regulatory tools for affordable housing (2.1, 2.2, 2.3), protecting low- and moderate-income tenants (2.4, 2.5). 2.1 Reduce the Tax Rate on Land Trust Properties to Align with the 4d Property Tax Classification Previous legislative sessions made changes to the tax classification of Community Land Trust properties by reducing the tax rate for the 1a – Residential Homestead classification, from an up to 1.25% rate to 0.75%. The City supports a change to align with the 4d property tax classification, which is applied to low-income rental properties at up to a 0.25% rate because: •Homeowners lease, and do not own, the land from the Land Trust. •The property is required to be affordable as memorialized through the ground lease. •The Land Trust is designed to create affordable home ownership opportunities, but requiring the homeowner to pay property taxes on the value of the house and the land at the single-family homestead rate makes homes less affordable. •Due to both leasing the land and the requirement that it stay affordable, 4d is a more appropriate tax classification than 1a. •Edina has 26 land trust residential properties, with property values in the city rapidly increasing. High property values and corresponding taxes impact the ability of land trust homeowners to remain in their home. 2.2 Protection of and Taxation for Housing Purchased by Corporations for Renting The City supports legislation that authorizes a tax on the sale of these properties to corporations and protections prohibiting the conversion of single-family residences into rental properties by developers and corporations. The City supports bills introduced in the 92nd legislature: SF 3147, imposing the tax, and SF 4313, prohibiting the conversion, because: •The City and surrounding communities have seen an increase in the number of residences converted from single family homes owned by the residents to rental properties. •Such conversion negatively impacts ownership opportunities for residents. 2.3 Support for “Missing Middle” Legislation with Local Controls While the “missing middle” housing bill in the 93rd Legislature (HF4009/SF3964) was tabled, the City would look favorably on legislation that similarly encourages and incentivizes “missing middle” housing and strategic land use adjustments, provided it has more flexibility for local control options. The City supports strategic gentle density because: •The City’s Climate Action Plan has goals for reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 7 percent and doubling public transit commuter ridership by 2030, both of which are only possible in a more walkable, bikeable, and transit-friendly Edina. •Diversifying housing stock by providing options such as accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and duplexes allows communities like Edina to maintain their suburban character while allowing more residents to age in place, downsize, purchase starter homes, raise their families where they themselves grew up, and more while remaining affordable. •Increasing the City’s population broadens the tax base, keeping individual household taxes low while maintaining high levels of municipal services. Page 1069 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 9 2.4 Discrimination Protections for Source of Income The City of Edina supports legislation amending the Minnesota Human Rights Act (specifically § 363A.09 Unfair Discriminatory Practices Relating to Real Property) to protect Minnesotans from being denied housing based on their source of income because: •The purpose of making housing discrimination based on a person’s source of income illegal is to increase housing choices for Minnesotans who utilize housing assistance such as emergency rental assistance or housing choice vouchers (also known as “Section 8”). •With the majority of Minnesotans who use federal housing choice vouchers being BIPOC, the denial of housing based on source of income widens racial disparities, preventing housing stability and exacerbating poverty and homelessness. Housing assistance is guaranteed income for landlords, providing them with more stable rental funds. 2.5 Reform Eviction Expungement Records of unlawful detainer filings, or eviction lawsuits, remain on a tenant’s public record regardless of whether the matter was settled or dismissed prior to the court hearing or if the tenant prevails at the hearing. The City supports legislation expanding the eligibility for discretionary and mandatory expungements for eviction case court files because: •In these cases, the eviction record is not a reasonable predictor of future tenant behavior and should be expunged. •The existence of this record impedes the ability of the renter to secure suitable rental housing in the future. 3 ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY Environment and sustainability has five thematic focuses: energy management and environment (3.1, 3.2, 3.3), right to repair (3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8), sustainable transportation (3.10, 3.11, 3.12), local environmental public health programs (3.12) and water resource management (3.13, 3.14) 3.1 Establish Building Performance Standards Large commercial buildings are a significant contributor to Minnesota’s and Edina’s greenhouse gas emissions. Building energy benchmarking is already in use, requiring building owners to report energy use but includes no requirement for improving their building’s energy efficiency. The City supports establishing building performance standards that: •Create greenhouse gas emission reduction and energy performance targets, a timeline to meet them, and resources to help building owners comply. 3.2 Establish a Right to Cooling Standard for Minnesotans In 2023, the Legislature passed a right to heating law for renters, to ensure renters have safe and functional homes. The City supports establishing a similar right to cooling, coupled with increased resources for the Energy Assistance Program (EAP) that provides utility bill relief and Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) that supports air sealing and insulation upgrades. Resources should include the ability to accept applications year-round and without a cap on annual service recipients. The City supports this because: •Minnesota is warming rapidly. •Excessive heat has well-documented health consequences, including serious illness and death. Page 1070 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 10 •Renters require additional protections to ensure landlords provide a safe and functional home. 3.3 Repeal the State’s Ban on Bag Bans With the passage of Edina’s Carryout Bag Ordinance, the City took one step toward shifting consumer behavior away from disposable goods. However, establishing a legislative path to ban plastic bags – produced by fossil fuels and source of microplastics – is an essential next step to materially reduce waste. 3.4 Allocate I 00% of State Revenue from the Solid Waste Management Tax (SCORE) to County Waste Management Activities Currently, the City is awarded a portion of the SCORE funds annually for residential recycling, residential organics recycling and participation in both at the multi-family building level. The City strives to spend 100% of the funds on allowable purposes. The City supports continued SCORE funding because: •The funds advance waste reduction, reuse, recycling and organics programs to meet city, county and state recycling goals. •SCORE funding allows the City to conduct critical outreach. 3.5 Support Efforts for the Proper Labeling of Compostable Products The City supports promoting only vetted manufactures because: •Working with only vetted manufactures reduces the likelihood of products with misleading claims to be sold or distributed in Minnesota. •It reduces City contamination in the recycling process. •It simplifies education on which certifications customers can look for. 3.6 Fund Expanded Infrastructure at the Local Level for the Creation of Compost Processing Sites and Anaerobic Digesters The City supports additional funding for counties creating compost processing sites and anaerobic digesters because: •Landfilling all waste in Hennepin County and metropolitan area is no longer a viable option. •Compost processing sites and anaerobic digesters provide more options for waste haulers. 3.7 Develop and Fund Zero-Waste Initiatives Zero-waste initiatives manage all discarded materials to their highest and best use according to the waste management hierarchy set forth in the Waste Management Act. The City supports the development of zero- waste initiatives because: •They will aid local governments reaching recycling and composting goals. •The City’s waste reduction goals mirror those set by the state, county and Edina’s climate action plans. 3.8 Expand Right to Repair Law The Digital Fair Repair Act that went into effect on July 1, 2024, is instrumental to reducing waste and encouraging reuse in Minnesota by furthering the life of consumer products. To further the success of the new law, the right to repair measures should be expanded to include previously excluded equipment such as farm equipment and wheelchairs (similar to Colorado’s law) and vehicles (such as in Massachusetts). Page 1071 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 11 Expanding on the right-to-repair to include more than just electronics would improve this new law to be even more equitable for a wider range of Minnesotans. 3.9 Increase Funding for the State E-bike Rebate Program In 2023, the State appropriated $2 million for a new e-bike rebate program. Expecting that eligible participants will each receive an average of $1,000, this is only 2,000 new e-bikes on the road. The City supports continuing and increasing this fund because: •2024 program demonstrated a high demand for assistance. •More low-income residents will be able to access new and climate friendly transportation. •E-bikes are associated with positive health benefits and increased mobility. 3.10 Establish State Funding to Support Expanded Carshare Networks in the Twin Cities and Minnesota Xcel Energy pulled private funding from HOURCAR in 2023, the nonprofit electric carshare service in Minneapolis and Saint Paul. The City supports an expanded network and has studied resident support via a partnership with the University of Minnesota’s Resilient Communities Project in 2022-23. The City supports this because: •Carshares are a viable alternative to owning a personal vehicle. •Carshares have a demonstrated history of reducing vehicle miles traveled. 3.11 Continue Support for Local Environmental Health Regulatory Programs Currently, the State delegates authority to operate food, pool and lodging establishment regulatory programs to cities and counties. The City supports continuing local operation of these public health services and programs, because: •It allows cities to provide services to meet local needs. 3.12 Support Funding Research, Training, and Legislation for Applicators of Chloride- Containing De-icing Chemicals Salt is a pollutant and causes damage to infrastructure and the environment. Private contractors tend to over-apply salt on parking lots and sidewalks, often because they are afraid of “slip-and-fall” lawsuits. The City supports state funding for research and training for public and private applicators of chloride-containing de-icing chemicals, and legislation to address liability concerns of private de-icing salt applicators because: •Waterbodies throughout the state, including within and downstream of Edina, fail to meet the water quality standards for chloride (salt) established by the state and so have been added to the federal register of impaired waters as required by the Clean Water Act. •The legislation, which is modeled on a similar law passed in New Hampshire, would incentivize contractors to attend training, get certified, and document their practices, reducing the over- application of salt. 3.13 Support for Truth in Labeling of Chloride- Containing De-icing Chemicals Truth in labeling can help consumers by providing access to accurate and comprehensive information regarding the composition, environmental impact, risks to infrastructure damage, and exposure risk to pets. Current labeling practices falsely claim or imply chloride containing products are environmentally safe and/or Page 1072 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 12 pet safe. Truth labeling would empower individuals to select the appropriate material for the job and reduce overapplication. 3.14 Support Reduction of Chloride Pollution from Wastewater Effluent Chloride pollution in wastewater effluent comes primarily from water softening processes. Reducing chloride in wastewater effluent is important for meeting clean water goals in downstream waterbodies. Wastewater generated locally is treated at the regional wastewater treatment plant before discharging to the Mississippi River. Reducing chloride pollution in wastewater will benefit downstream aquatic ecosystems, protect drinking water sources, and extend the lifespan of water infrastructure. 3.15 Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) Municipal Grant Program Inflow and infiltration (I/I) describe the ways that groundwater and stormwater make its way into sanitary sewer pipes and gets treated, unnecessarily, at regional wastewater plants. The Metropolitan Council identifies cities contributing excessive I/I into the regional wastewater system and charges the city for the excess. The City supports state financial assistance to cities for metro area I/I mitigation, such as the Municipal State Bond Grant Program because: •I/I mitigation supports efficient use of the regional system for waste treatment. •I/I mitigation slows the need for capacity upgrades. 4 TRANSPORTATION 4.1 Continue and Increase Municipal State Aid (MSA) Funding The City has 40.85 miles of roads designated as MSA. This state funding is vital to maintain these high-quality connections. The City asks for continued support of municipal state aid funding because: •The state aid road system was developed to provide vital, high-quality connections necessary for the overall state highway network to work well. •The roads that are on the state aid system typically carry heavier traffic volumes, connect major points of interest and provide an integrated and coordinated road system. 4.2 Municipal State Aid (MSA) Cost Participation The City supports malleability in, or exemption from, cost participation policies, especially for cities with a disproportionate amount of state or county highways within and encircling their local boundaries. Special or additional funding from the state legislative for cities that have these burdens of additional cost participation in projects involving state and county roads including the placement of underground utilities due to those projects should be supported. 4.3 Increase Local Bridge Replacement Program (LBRP) Funding The Local Bridge Replacement Program provides local agencies funding for the reconstruction, rehabilitation or removal of bridges or structures. The program is financed by the passage of specific legislation allocating general obligation state bond funds, but regularly does not receive enough funding. The City supports funding dedicated to the Local Bridge Replacement Program to provide safe bridges because: •The City has 27 local bridges. Page 1073 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 13 4.4 Expansion of Public Transportation Frequency and Reach Edina, like much of the Metro area, continues to experience a persistent reduction in transit service frequency and reach as a result of pandemic-era service reductions and workforce shortages. The City supports additional funding to return transit service to pre-pandemic levels, support operator hiring initiatives, and develop a connecting bus study for the METRO Green Line Extension (Southwest LRT) because: •The City’s transit ridership prior to the pandemic was about half the average rate of Hennepin County. •Adequate public transit offerings are essential to doubling public transit ridership to seven percent by 2030 to reach our Climate Action Plan goals. Adequate public transit offerings are essential to meeting the City’s climate action goals. •Transit service supports many community and regional goals, including improving mobility, relieving traffic congestion, reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and promoting sustainable development and growth. 4.5 Support Tools and Strategies to Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled Transportation emissions account for 40% of Edina’s baseline greenhouse gas emissions and are projected to become the leading emissions source in Edina as the energy sector decarbonizes. The City supports funding to provide alternative transportation infrastructure to decrease the use of single-occupancy vehicles and their associated negative impacts on air quality, traffic congestion and quality of life because: •Total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in Edina in 2021 was more than 500 million miles, an increase from past years. •The City’s Climate Action Plan identified a goal to reduce VMT by seven percent by 2030. •Decreasing commuters driving alone by six percent to match the county-wide average would decrease VMT by up to 10 million miles. 5 PUBLIC SAFETY 5.1 Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Local Control In February 2022, the Office of the Legislative Auditor (OLA) released a report that found serious deficiencies with both the management of the Emergency Medical Service Regulatory Board and the current ambulance service license process. During the 2023 legislative session, the Minnesota Fire Association Coalition introduced legislation, HF2736 and SF2691, to implement the recommendations of the OLA relating to the primary service areas. The City supports this legislation because: •Local governments should be able to set standards for EMS service in their communities. •Local governments should have the authority to find an EMS provider than can meet local standards. 5.2 Residential Fire Sprinklers There are few statutory requirements for residential fire sprinklers. The City opposes efforts to statutorily limit the use of residential fire sprinklers and supports the inclusion of professionals and industry experts in the creating or writing of any code parameters, particularly the installation of fire suppression systems in residential building code, because: •Sprinklers protect occupants, firefighters and property from fires. Page 1074 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 14 •Recent Minnesota studies show the cost of installing residential fire sprinkler systems averages $1.15 per sprinklered square foot, or approximately one percent of new home construction. 5.3 Support Funding for Auto Theft and Violent Crime Investigation The City supports the creation and funding of a multijurisdictional group of law enforcement officials focusing on investigations and prevention because auto theft and violent crimes committed in stolen vehicles have dramatically increased. The City would also support funding for stronger juvenile justice resources, such as building metropolitan area facilities that will house juvenile offenders, as these facilities could include both detention and supportive resources, such as mental health evaluations and care, educational, vocational and life skills training, mentorship and community reentry programs, etc. 5.4 Support Funding and Programming for Recruitment and Retention Needs The City supports a variety of funded recruitment and retention programs for law enforcement agencies. Programs include creating a state funded grant program for bonuses, renewing part-time officer licenses for small agencies, paid health care for licensed police officers who retire at 55 after 10 consecutive years of service with a Minnesota city, deferred retirement option programs, county or tribal government and scholarship programs with higher education partners. The City supports these state funded programs because: •Agencies of all sizes are having trouble recruiting and retaining officers. •Out-of-state agencies are recruiting Minnesota officers away from the state through reciprocity tests and other minimal out-of-state requirements. •Deferred retirement option programs in particular would help stabilize the workforce. 5.5 Fund additional K-12 Threat Assessments The City supports legislation which would require school districts to study and address general and specific school safety issues because: •Previous funding, including the grants passed by the Legislature in 2018, only provided for infrastructure improvements. •Further assessment of school safety issues, beyond physical infrastructure, is needed. 5.6 Increase Penalty for Fleeing in a Motor Vehicle and Allow Use of Mobile Tracking Devices Currently, the penalty for an offender fleeing is relatively low and using tracking devices on stolen vehicles is only allowed with owner consent or a search warrant. The City supports increasing the penalty for fleeing and allowing officers to use mobile tracking devices on fleeing vehicles under specific circumstances. The City supports this because: •The number of offenders who flee police officers has increased as police departments shift away from pursuing due to the high level of risk to the community. It is well known that police will often not pursue, due to the risk. •Increasing the penalty more appropriately captures the risk to the community when an offender flees. •Allowing officers to use mobile tracking devices when an officer has reason to believe a vehicle is stolen or the driver has committed a crime reduces the need to pursue many offenders, allowing for both safer streets and the ability to safely locate offenders. Page 1075 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 15 5.7 Revise School Resource Officer Legislation In 2023, the 93rd Legislature changed the reasonable force standards by which school resource officers act in schools. The City supports the following amendments to legislation: Minnesota Statute 121A.582, Subd. 1(b): Subd. 1 (b) expand the definition of when “reasonable force” may be used by amending the language as follows: “to restrain a student and or prevent bodily harm or death to the student or another.” Subd. 1 (b) clarify that use of reasonable force by a school resource officer or police officer contracted with a district is regulated by Minnesota Statute 609.06. Minnesota Statute 121A.58: Subd. 2 (a) AND Subd. 2 (b): Remove “school resource officer” and “police officer contracted with the district” from roles covered by this subdivision. Add a section that makes the exclusion of “school resource officers” and “police officers contracted with a district” from the definition of “agents” or “employees” of a school district explicit. The City supports these amendments because: •The current legislation has competing interpretations, some allowing for restraint and some banning it except in the most extreme cases, and potentially creating different reasonable force standards for school resource officers and police officers. •School resource officer programs can benefit students, officers, and communities through positive interactions. The current legal confusion caused many partnerships between schools and police departments to be put on pause, absent clear direction. 5.8 Transparent and Holistic Brady/Giglio Legislation The subject of Brady/Giglio received statewide attention in the 2024 legislative session by bills introduced by the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office allowing access to all private data on police officers. Additionally, several bills were introduced by legislators to have a statewide Brady standard for police officers, county attorneys, and the judiciary to follow. The City of Edina asserts that any proposed bill must include a statutory definition of Brady material, due process for an officer or police agency to contest a county attorney’s designation of Brady material, requirement to maintain any kind of Brady data on officers and who can access the data, CJIS security compliance of data, and uniformity of protective court orders involving Brady material. The Minnesota Chiefs-Police Association (MCPA) has supported legislation for numerous years through the Officer Integrity Act allowing for a Minnesota Licensed Peace Officer to be terminated from public employment without opportunity to challenge the remedy of termination should the basis for termination be willful or intentional dishonestly, deception, or similar unethical or illegal conduct that is deemed sufficient to imperil their credibility in court testimony. The City of Edina does not support limiting an officer’s due process right to arbitration. A well-developed and transparent Brady/Giglio process will provide confidence and legitimacy for all participants in the criminal justice process and the public as other states have enacted (examples: Colorado and Iowa). 5.9 Support for First Responder Buffer Zone Protection The City supports legislation that would assist officers making arrests in difficult situations. This legislation would make it illegal to approach within 25 feet of a working first responder after being asked or ordered to Page 1076 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 16 back up. Similar legislation was passed earlier this year in Louisiana and Florida. The ultimate goal is to help keep our first responders safe while working. Those first responders could be law enforcement officers, correctional probation officers, firefighters, and/or emergency medical care providers. Page 1077 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 17 City of Edina Staff Contact Information Priorities Scott Neal, City Manager, can be contacted regarding any of the legislative priorities, in addition to the staff below. He can be reached at SNeal@EdinaMN.gov or 952-826-0401. 1 Expansion of Local Sales Tax Spending Plan Scott Neal, City Manager SNeal@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0401 2 Bonding for Interchange Improvements at Minnesota Highway 100 and Vernon Avenue/West 50th Street Chad Millner, Director of Engineering CMillner@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0318 3 Bonding for Aquatic Center Perry Vetter, Director of Parks & Recreation PVetter@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0430 4 Sales Tax Exemption for Projects in the Braemar Park Master Plan and Fred Richards Park Master Plan Perry Vetter, Director of Parks & Recreation PVetter@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0430 5 Funding Support for Entrepreneurs and Second-Stage Businesses Scott Neal, City Manager SNeal@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0401 6 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) legislation for 70th and France and 72nd and France Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager BNeuendorf@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0407 7 Protect Municipal Employees with Enforcement Functions Scott Neal, City Manager SNeal@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0401 Page 1078 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 18 Positions 1 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 1.1 Re-align Motor Vehicle Lease Sales Tax Allocation 1.2 Increase Purchasing Authority 1.3 Adult-Use Cannabis 1.4 Allow Restrictions on Possession of Firearms in Municipal Facilities with School-Like Use 1.5 Remove Language in the Minnesota State Constitution Allowing for Enslavement of Incarcerated People 1.6 Empower Unbanked Minnesotans to Participate in the Local Economy 1.7 Data Practices and Personal Information 1.8 Various Election Support 1.9 Hearing Aid Affordability Scott Neal, City Manager SNeal@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0401 1.10 Change Group Home Regulation Cary Teague, Community Development Director CTeague@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0460 1.11 Reinforce the Open Wholesaling Systems through Legislation 1.12 Oppose Changes to Tap Rooms Retail Operations 1.13 Protect Customer Data 1.14 Clarity on THC-Infused Products 1.15 Maintain Constraints on Off-Sale Liquor Josh Furbish, Liquor Operations General Manager JFurbish@EdinaMN.gov 952-903-5732 2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 2.1 Reduce the Tax Rate on Land Trust Properties to Align with the 4d Property Tax Classification 2.2 Protection of and Taxation for Housing Purchased by Corporations for Renting 2.3 Support for “Missing Middle” Legislation with Local Controls 2.4 Discrimination Protections for Source of Income 2.5 Reform Eviction Expungement Stephanie Hawkinson, Affordable Housing Development Manager SHawkinson@EdinaMN.gov 952-833-9578 Page 1079 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 19 3 ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY 3.1 Establish Building Performance Standards 3.2 Establish a Right to Cooling Standard for Minnesotans 3.3 Repeal the State’s Ban on Bag Bans Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager MBayer@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-1621 3.4 Allocate I 00% of State Revenue from the Solid Waste Management Tax (SCORE) to County Waste Management Activities 3.5 Support Efforts for the Proper Labeling of Compostable Products 3.6 Fund Expanded Infrastructure at the Local Level for the Creation of Compost Processing Sites and Anaerobic Digesters 3.7 Develop and Fund Zero-Waste Initiatives Twila Singh, Organics Recycling Coordinator TSingh@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-1657 3.8 Expand Right to Repair Law 3.9 Increase Funding for State E-Bike Rebate Program 3.10 Establish State Funding to Support Expanded Carshare Networks Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager MBayer@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-1621 3.11 Continue Support for Local Environmental Health Regulatory Programs Jeff Brown, Community Health Administrator JBrown@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0466 3.12 Support Funding Research, Training, and Legislation for Applicators of Chloride-Containing De-Icing Chemicals 3.13 Support for Truth in Labeling for Chloride-Containing De-Icing Chemicals 3.14 Support Reduction of Chloride Pollution from Wastewater Effluent Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, Water Resources Coordinator JWilson@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0445 3.15 Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) Municipal Grant Program Ross Bintner, Engineering Services Manager RBintner@EdinaMN.gov 952-903-5713 Page 1080 of 1086 STAFF REPORT Page 20 4 TRANSPORTATION 4.1 Continue and Increase Municipal State Aid (MSA) Funding 4.2 Municipal State Aid (MSA) Cost Participation 4.3 Increase Funding for Local Bridge Replacement Program (LBRP) Funding 4.4 Expansion of Public Transportation Frequency and Reach 4.5 Support Tools and Strategies to Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled Chad Millner, Director of Engineering CMillner@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0318 Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner AScipioni@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0440 5 PUBLIC SAFETY 5.1 Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Local Control 5.2 Residential Fire Sprinklers Andrew Slama, Chief of Fire ASlama@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0332 5.3 Support Funding for Auto Theft and Violent Crime Investigation 5.4 Support Funding and Programming for Recruitment and Retention Needs 5.5 Fund Additional K-12 Threat Assessments 5.6 Increase Penalty for Fleeing in a Motor Vehicle and Allow Use of Mobile Tracking Devices 5.7 Revise School Resource Officer Legislation 5.8 Transparent and Holistic Brady/Giglio Legislation 5.9 Support for First Responder Buffer Zone Protection Todd Milburn, Chief of Police TMilburn@EdinaMN.gov 952-826-0487 Page 1081 of 1086 2025 Legislative Platforms – Review of Received Council Feedback December 3, 2024 – Work Session Expansion of Local Sales Tax Spending Plan The City of Edina seeks local authority to spend revenue collected under its current voter-approved local sales tax for the full nineteen-year period for which it is authorized on capital improvements on parks & recreation projects that serve a regional population. Proposals to spend these funds will be submitted to voter approval during a regularly scheduled local election. This proposal does not increase the term of the sales tax beyond its current nineteen-year term. This proposal does not increase the rate of the current local sales tax. This proposal does not increase the scope of applicability of the current local sales tax. 1. State Platform (Priority 1) – Expansion of Local Sales Tax Spending Plan a. CM Jackson – Requested to remove. Concerns about what was communicated to voters. Funding Support for Entrepreneurs and Second-Stage Businesses The City of Edina is pursuing direct funding from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development and/or Veterans Affairs to support the Edina Chamber of Commerce and BIG/Edina Business Innovation Lab to support ongoing support of entrepreneurs and second-stage businesses. Supporting a three-to-five-year funding commitment at $200,000 annually would allow these organizations to serve more clients and pursue higher levels of economic growth. 2. State Platform (Priority 5) – Funding Support for Entrepreneurs and Second-Stage Businesses a. CM Jackson - Opposes this as worded. Feels that the City is in a place to endorse funding being directed to Edina Chamber of Commerce and BIG/Edina Business Innovation Lab but does not believe the City of Edina should ask for these funds for itself. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Legislation for 70th and France and 72nd and France #2 The City approved the 70th and France and 72nd and France #2 TIF Districts in 2022 and 2023 respectively to encourage reinvestment and redevelopment of substandard commercial properties. After considerable discussion, the City also entered into TIF redevelopment agreements with each development team to provide TIF funding subject to project completion and delivery of proposed public benefits. The City requests an extension of the five-year rule to 10 years. In addition, the City requests the ability to extend the terms of each TIF agreement, subject to approval by Edina City Council. When these Districts were established, the developers were on pace to redevelop the sites with new commercial and multi-family housing buildings and the existing buildings were demolished. Since the Districts were established and the substandard buildings removed, the national economic climate has changed significantly. Costs of construction material and labor have increased. Interest rates have increased. The ability of private banks to finance office buildings has decreased. The availability of private equity has also decreased. This situation is forecasted to see a slow recovery beginning in 2025. Unfortunately, this pause in private financing hinders the ability of both redevelopment projects to succeed. The ‘five-year rule’ in Minnesota TIF statutes will likely disqualify these sites from the use of TIF at the level needed for success. Without the pledge of TIF to fill the financial gap, neither of these projects will reach their potential. Page 1082 of 1086 2025 Legislative Platforms – Review of Received Council Feedback December 3, 2024 – Work Session The City requests an extension of the five-year rule to 10 years to allow the private lending sector to return to normal. In addition, the City requests the ability to extend the terms of each TIF agreement, subject to approval by Edina City Council. This would increase the 15-year term of the 70th and France District to 25 years and the 25-year term of the 72nd and France #2 District to 30 years. 3. State Platform (Priority 6) – Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Legislation for 70th and France and 72nd and France #2 a. CM Jackson - Does not support the extension of TIF districts to 25 years and 30 years. Data Practices and Personal Information The purpose of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) is to provide open and transparent information to the public, while protecting personal information from indiscriminate disclosure. The City supports mechanisms to define and regulate reasonable data requests, and charges that better reflect the actual costs of responding to data requests due to increases in data requests and increased staff time required for repetitive, broad and far-reaching requests. •Cities are experiencing increases in repetitive, overly broad, and far-reaching data requests. •These requests require significant staff time to locate government records, redact private data or data unrelated to the request, and assemble documents to be provided in order to comply with requirements to provide access to public government data. 4. State Platform (Position 1.8) – Data Practices and Personal Information a. CM Jackson - Feels this should be a top priority of the city. Change Group Home Regulation Licensed residential facilities do not have any distance separation requirements in single-family residential use zones in Edina. Minn. Stat. 245A.11 allows distance requirements of 1,320 feet between licensed residential facilities but limits the scope inequitably to cities in the first class. The City supports licensed residential facility use in the City and urges this distance separation requirements be applied fairly to all cities because: •Grouping multiple facilities on the same block in a single-family residential neighborhood creates substantial challenges to the neighborhood and reduces the community experience of individuals in the facilities. •Individuals no longer reap the benefit of enjoying a residential setting with a diversity of households. When entire blocks are acquired for licensed residential facilities, the setting is more similar to a large institutional campus. •Neighborhoods experience an increase in traffic, parking needs, deliveries, and other activities compounded by numerous facilities on the same block. •Grouping multiple facilities effectively turns a residential area into a commercial area. 5. State Platform (Position 1.10) – Change Group Home Regulation a. CM Jackson - Thinks that 1,320 feet is far too big a zone, and it should be 100 – 200 feet. Clarity on THC-Infused Products With the passage of Minn. Stat. 151.72 in July 2022, products containing THC are permitted for sale. The City seeks clarification on if retail liquor stores can sell THC-infused beverages because: Page 1083 of 1086 2025 Legislative Platforms – Review of Received Council Feedback December 3, 2024 – Work Session •Without federal passage of the SAFE banking act, cannabis-related legitimate operations cannot generate proceeds from unlawful activity, and banking institutions can be penalized by federal authorities for providing services to a cannabis-related business. •Current regulation allows for retailers like Edina Liquor to accept credit card payments only if the percent of total revenue from THC products is less than 15%. 6. State Platform (Position 1.15) – Clarity on THC-Infused Products a. CM Jackson - Thinks this position should be moved from the state to the federal legislative platform. Repeal the State’s Ban on Bag Bans With the passage of Edina’s Carryout Bag Ordinance, the City took one step toward shifting consumer behavior away from disposable goods. However, establishing a legislative path to ban plastic bags – produced by fossil fuels and source of microplastics – is an essential next step to materially reduce waste. 7. State Platform (Position 3.3) – Repeal the State’s Ban on Bag Bans a. CM Jackson - Doesn’t agree with this statement and feels that bag bans lead people to buy heavier plastic bags, defeating the goal of reducing fossil fuel use. Would like to remove this item. --- 8. State Platform – New Position/Priority a. CM Agnew - Can we have some language that takes a position on changing state legislation for New Construction Warranty, or the 1-2-10 Warranty, for promotion of more owner-occupied housing? b.STAFF ACTION: Assistant City Manager Lenz reached out to our state lobbyist, Katy Sen, who informed staff that Rep. Elkins had been looking into this issue for the 2025 session. i. This position/priority would likely be more akin to a broad vision statement to say something along the lines of “we support opportunities that promote affordable home ownership for residents,” or “we support removing regulations that limit residents’ potential for affordable home ownership” 9. State and/or Federal Platform – New Position/Priority a. Mayor Hovland - High Cost of Building and Unit Insurance and Condo Association Fees Compounded with a Lack of Accountability i. Has received multiple messages from residents in Edina that are concerned for their ability to continue to afford their units as well as the quality of infrastructure and accountability with building owners and management Page 1084 of 1086 From:Scott H. Neal To:jhovland@hovlandrasmus.com; James Pierce; Carolyn Jackson; Kate Agnew; Julie Risser Cc:Ari Lenz; Jennifer Garske; Sharon Allison Subject:Prep Memo forr the December 17, 2024 City Council Meeting and Work Session Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 2:58:29 PM Good Afternoon Everyone – WORK SESSION Remember that our work session starts at 5:15pm tonight. Staff will facilitate a Council discussion about the City’s 2025 Legislative Platform and Priorities. We have 15 minutes allocated too this task, so hoping we can wrap it up within that time frame. Following the legislative platform discussion we will move on to the discussion about the zoning audit. Jeff Miller from HKGi will be our primary speaker. He will be introduced by Addison Lewis from our Community Development Department. CITY COUNCIL MEETING CM Risser has asked for item 6.3 to be removed from the Consent Agenda. The Mayor will give a report to the public on the closed session discussion about my performance review tonight during his report. I will ask for Council’s approval of the legislative platform, as amended, in my report. Finance Director Thao has an illness and is not able to join us tonight. Ari and I will deliver the budget presentations and answer questions. We have a brief HRA meeting scheduled for after tonight’s Council meeting in order to approve the 2025 levy and budget Page 1085 of 1086 for the HRA This evening’s meeting will be our final City Council meeting and work session for 2024. We have a final HRA meeting on Thursday morning December 19 at 7:30am. That’s all I have for you right now. See you at 5:15pm in the Community Room. Scott Scott H. Neal, City Manager952-826-0401 | Fax 952-826-0390sneal@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Follow me on Twitter. Page 1086 of 1086