Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-05-19 City Council Meeting
AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING • CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, MAY 19, 2015 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 11. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA All agenda items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda by a Member of the City Council. In such cases the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered immediately following the adoption of the Consent Agenda. (Favorable rollcall vote of majority of Council Members present to approve.) A. Approval Of Minutes — Regular Meeting Of May 6, 2015 and, Work Session Of May 6, 2015 B. Receive Payment of Claims As Per: Pre -List Dated, 05/07/2015 TOTAL: • $905,234.36 And Per Pre -List Dated 05/14/2015 TOTAL: $1,428,033.44 C. Traffic Safety Report of April 1, 2015 D. Authorize Engineering Services For Tracy Avenue, Valley View Road, & Valley Lane Intersection Improvements E. Authorize Watermain Cleaning Services For the Morningside Neighborhood F. Authorize Public Improvements And Special Assessment Agreements G. Request For Purchase: Braemar Golf Course Entrance Sign H. Request For Purchase Citywide Asset and Energy Management Program 1. Request For Purchase Professional Service Braun Intertec J. Request For Purchase: 2016 Ford F550, Public Works, Concrete Streets K. Request For Purchase: 2016 Ford F550 With Utility Box, Public Works, Utility L. Request For Purchase: Crosswalk Installation Services at 50th & France Business District M. Resolution No. 2015 -52 Accepting Hennepin County Public Space Recycling Grant N. O. P. • V. SPEC A. B. Resolution No. 2015 -53 Authorizing Support For The Blake Road Corridor Study Grant Second Reading Ordinance No. 2015 -07 Amending Zoning Ordinance Approve Amendment To Investment Authorization Policy IAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS Proclamation — EMS Week May 17 — 23, 2015 Speak Up Edina — Feedback On City Taglines Agenda May 19, 2015 Page 2 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS • During "Public Hearings," the Mayor will ask for public testimony after City staff' members make their presentations. If you wish to testify on the topic, you are welcome to do so as long as your testimony is relevant to the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers and to allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing speakers must observe the following guidelines: Individuals must limit their testimony to three minutes. The Mayor may modify times, as deemed necessary. Try not to repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit testimony to the matter under consideration. In order to maintain a respectful environment for all those in attendance, the use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. A. PUBLIC HEARING — Improvement Hearing For TH 100 Noise Wall Improvements Improvement No. SA -17, Resolution No. 2015 -50 (Favorable rollcall vote of 3 Council members to pass.) VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the City Council will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Council or which aren't slated for future consideration. 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. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to respond to their comments tonight. Instead the • Council might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VIII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A. Vision Edina Strategic Vision And Framework Report B. Braemar City of Lake Figure Skating Club And Edina Hockey Association Memorandum of Understanding C. Resolution No. 2015 -45 Accepting Donations & Grants D. Resolution No. 2015 -51 Providing For The Sale Of Bonds Series 2015A And 2015B IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Correspondence B. Advisory Communication From Human Rights & Relations Commission, Vision Edina Feedback C. Minutes: I. Park Board, April 14, 2015 2. Veteran's Memorial, March 27, 2015 3. Planning Commission, April 8, and April 22, 2015 X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE XI. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS XII. MANAGER'S COMMENTS Ll • • Agenda May 19, 2015 Page 3 XIII. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA EDINA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY I. CALL TO ORDER 11. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF HRA — MAY 6, 2015 V. RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -02 PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF BONDS, SERIES 2015 VI. ADJOURNMENT 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 72 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS Tues May 19 Closed Session — Possible Real Estate Acquisition Weber Woods Update 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues May 19 Work Session — Grandview Development Alternatives 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues May 19 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon May 25 MEMORIAL DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues June 2 Work Session — Parking & Future of City Owned Properties 50th & France 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Affordable Housing 6:15 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues June 2 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues June 16 Work Session —joint Meeting with Edina Transportation Commission 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Joint Meeting with Bike Edina 6:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues June 16 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Fri July 3 INDEPENDENCE DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Sat July 4 INDEPENDENCE DAY PARADE Tues July 7 Work Session — Sidewalk & Street Maintenance 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Utility Rate Study SAS P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM White Oaks Improvement Association 6:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues July 7 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues July 21 Work Session — Business Meeting/201 -2017 Proposed Budget 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues July 21 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Aug 4 Night To Unite •Wed Aug 5 Work Session COMMUNITY ROOM Wed Aug 5 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Aug 18 Promenade Phase 5 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Aug 18 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL MAY 6, 2015 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. 11. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, and Mayor Hovland. 111. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Stewart, approving the meeting agenda as revised to remove Item IV.C. Approve Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Policy. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Staunton, approving the consent agenda as revised to remove Items IV.G. Continue to June 16, 2015 Findings of Fact for Denial, Comprehensive Plan Amendments for Building Height, Density and Floor Area Ratio, 7200 France Avenue, 7200 LLC and IV.H. Continue to June 16, 2015 Findings of Fact for Denial, Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan, 7200 France Avenue, 7200 LLC, as follows: IV.A. Approve regular and work session meeting minutes of April 21, 2015 IV.B. Receive payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated April 23, 2015, and consisting of 23 pages; General Fund $156,677.20; Police Special Revenue $1,539.26; Working Capital Fund $30,251.08; Equipment Replacement Fund $53,402.39; Art Center Fund $1,177.02; Golf Dome Fund $596.00; Aquatic Center Fund $24.69; Golf Course Fund $15,098.53; Ice Arena Fund $8,969.60; Sports Dome Fund $2,073.78; Edinborough Park Fund $170.48; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $3,863.86; Liquor Fund $177,286.13; Utility Fund $48,251.96; Storm Sewer Fund $29.66; PSTF Agency Fund $161.10; Centennial TIF District $142,667.61; Grandview TIF District $1,307.09; Southdale 2 District $1 1,702.50; Pentagon Park District $I OS.00; Payroll Fund $2,585.70; TOTAL $657,940.64 and for receipt of payment of claims dated April 30, 2015, and consisting of 33 pages; General Fund $194,59236; Police Special Revenue $7,950.25; Arts and Culture Fund $5,000.00; General Debt Service Fund $5,000.00; PIR Debt Service Fund $2,975.00; Working Capital Fund $187,154.86; Equipment Replacement Fund $24,491.43; Cando Fund $75.03; Art Center Fund $2,641.24; Golf Dome Fund $74.39; Aquatic Center Fund $329.48; Golf Course Fund $21,193.08; Ice Arena Fund $35,976.99; Sports Dome Fund $224,243.24; Edinborough Park Fund $11,967.86; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $7,1 14.25; Liquor Fund $199,146.66; Utility Fund $42,317.78; Storm Sewer Fund $11,549.46; PSTF Agency Fund $954.67; Payroll Fund $9,200.00; TOTAL $993,948.23 M.C. Approve Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Polic IV.D. Request for Purchase, Award of Quote Contract ENG 15 -8NB 2015 Storm Sewer Improvements, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Northwest Asphault, Inc. at $54,917.00 IV.E. Adopt Resolution No. 2015 -44, Approving Joint Powers Agreement with Edina Public Schools for Countryside H Neighborhood Improvement Project IV.F. Authorize Promenade Phase 4 — Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Grant Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council /May 6, 2015 W.G. Continue to June 16, 2015 Findings of Fact for Denial, Comprehensive Pla Amendments for Building Height, Density and Floor Area Ratio, France Avenue, 7200 LLC W.H. Denial, Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan;; 200 France Avenue, 72^—.z IV.I. Authorize Settlement with Meisinger Construction Promenade Project Rollcall: Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA IV.G. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DENIAL, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR BUILDING HEIGHT, DENSITY AND FLOOR AREA RATIO, 7200 FRANCE AVENUE, 7200 LLC – CONTINUED TO JUNE I6, 2015 Member Stewart stated that he was against the extensions and would continue to vote against them. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Staunton, to Continue to June 16, 2015 Findings of Fact for Denial, Comprehensive Plan Amendments for Building Height, Density and Floor Area Ration, 7200 France Avenue, 7200 LLC. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Stewart Motion carried. IV.H. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DENIAL, PRELIMINARY REZONING AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 7200 FRANCE AVENUE, 7200 LLC – CONTINUED TO JUNE 16, 2015 Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Staunton, to Continue to June 16, • 2015 Findings of Fact for Denial, Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan, 7200 France Avenue, 7200 LLC. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Stewart Motion carried. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS V.A. NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK – PROCLAIMED Mayor Hovland read the National Public Works Week Proclamation. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to proclaim the week of May 17 -23, 2015 as National Public Works Week in the City of Edina. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Public Works Director Olson accepted the Proclamation, shared the theme "Community Begins Here" for National Public Works Week, and highlighted the services of Public Works. V.B. NATIONAL POLICE WEEK, MAY 10-16,201S –PROCLAIMED Mayor Hovland read the National Police Week 2015 Proclamation. Member Stewart made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to proclaim May 10 -16, 2015 as National Police Week in the City of Edina. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. • Deputy Chief Elasky accepted the Proclamation and thanked the Council. V.C. MONARCH BUTTERFLY MONTH –PROCLAIMED Page 2 Minutes /Edina City Council /May 6. 2015 Mayor Hovland read the Monarch Butterfly Month Proclamation. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to proclaim the month of May 2015 the time for Edina • residents to plant milkweed seeds. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Ward Johnson, 6408 Indian Hills Road, accepted the Proclamation and thanked the Council. V.D. PRESERVATION MONTH — PROCLAIMED Mayor Hovland read the Preservation Month Proclamation. Member Stewart made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to proclaim May 2015 as Preservation Month in the City of Edina. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Senior Planner Repya accepted the Proclamation and thanked the Council. V. E. 2015 EDINA HERITAGE AWARD — PRESENTED Senior Planner Repya provided a presentation on the Edina Heritage Award in recognition of Savory's Gardens for being a thriving nursery business since 1946. Mayor Hovland presented Arlene Savory and son with the 2015 Edina Heritage Award. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD — Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VI.A. APPLICATIONS FOR A CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE — RECEIVED AND CONSIDERED Manager Neal introduced Brian Grogan, Moss & Barnett, legal counsel and administrator of the Southwest Cable Commission. Attorney Grogan reported that CenturyLink was seeking a competitive franchise and highlighted important pieces of the Federal Cable Act. Mr. Grogan presented the franchise application timeline, existing Comcast franchise, and Minnesota statutes. The main issue was whether State law or Federal law was applicable for the build out. Comcast had submitted a letter indicating it believed that State law was applicable and requested that Edina hold CenturyLink to State law mandates. Attorney Grogan answered a question of the Council indicating there would be two phases in discovering whether CenturyLink should be given a competitive franchise. The first phase would be whether the company possessed the requisite legal, financial, and technical qualifications. The second phase would be based on a reasonable standard with respect to the award of the franchise based on the laws described. Tyler Middleton, CenturyLink Vice President of Operations for Minnesota, shared highlights of Centuryl-ink's technical and operational capabilities to provide video services. Patrick Haggerty, CenturyLink Director of Regulatory and Governmental Affairs, discussed the legal side of the franchise. The Council asked questions relating to how soon the service would be available to residents in different areas of Edina, other communities that CenturyLink was serving, and the build out timing plan. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. • Public Testimony Jim Grotz, 5513 Park Place, addressed the Council. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing. Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /May 6, 2015 Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. • VI.B. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING LOT DIVISION PROCEDURES, REZONING PROCEDURES, SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS AND R -2 REGULATIONS — ORDINANCE NO. 2015 -07 FIRST READING GRANTED Community Development Director Presentation Community Development Director Teague reported on a Zoning Ordinance Amendment regarding procedures for lot divisions and rezoning; side yard setback requirements; and, R -2 district regulations. The proposed Ordinance was the result of the recommendations from the Planning Commission and City Council Work Session held on February 17, 2015 regarding the City's rezoning procedure. Mr. Teague presented a summary of the following ten sections of the Ordinance: Section I. Lot Division /Party Wall Division; Section 2. Window Well; Section 3. Plan Modifications; Sections 4. and 5. Procedure for Rezoning; Sections 6. and 7. Building Coverage, Side Yard Setback Requirements; Section 8. R -2 District Regulations; Section 9. Building Height; and, Section 10. Nonconforming R -2 Lots. Staff answered questions of the Council relating to requirements for window wells and side yard setbacks. The Council discussed changing the wording for the definition of window well in Section 2. of the Ordinance and made clarifying suggestions for Second Reading. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:41 p.m. Public Testimony John Crabtree, 5408 Oaklawn Avenue, addressed the Council. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing. • Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council discussed the issue of developers infringing on neighboring properties and directed staff to add that topic to the work plan for the Planning Commission. Attorney Knutson read an accepted definition of window wells. Member Swenson made a motion to grant First Reading to Ordinance No. 2015 -07, Amending Chapters 32 and 36 of the Edina City Code as revised to include a clarifying definition of window wells. Member Stewart seconded the motion. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI.C. PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH LOT WIDTH AND AREA VARIANCES, 5825 ASHCROFT AVENUE, JEFFREY AND JANINE JOHNSON — RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -49 ADOPTED Community Development Director Presentation Community Development Director Teague presented a request from Jeffrey and Janine Johnson to subdivide their property at 5825 Ashcroft Avenue into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new single - family homes built on the new lots. Mr. Teague presented a map of the property and explained that both lots would gain access off Ashcroft Avenue. Within the neighborhood, the median lot area was 6,790 square feet, median lot depth was 135 feet, and the median lot width was 50 feet. The new lots meet the median width and depth, but would be just short of the median area. The primary issue for the Council to consider was whether the variance standards were met. Staff and the Planning Commission agree the standards were met and recommend approval. • Proponent Presentation Jeffrey Johnson, 5825 Ashcroft Avenue, presented Hennepin County maps of the property and discussed each of the four questions required by City Code to approve a variance. Page 4 Minutes /Edina City Council /May 6, 2015 Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:15 p.m. • Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Stewart, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Stewart introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2015 -49, Approving a Preliminary Plat with Variances at 5825 Ashcroft Avenue. Member Brindle seconded the motion. The Council discussed the existing trees on the property and whether to add a requirement to save the trees, but decided that it was difficult to hold a single property to a higher standard. The Council noted this property was subject to the Tree Preservation Ordinance that would take effect in July. Member Swenson noted that she had consistently voted against these requests and acknowledged some concerns from neighbors. Rollcall: Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland Nay: Swenson Motion carried. VI.D. LIVING STREETS PLAN — APPROVED Transportation Planner Nolan shared that the City Council had passed the Living Streets Policy in August 2013 and that Policy called for the development of a Living Streets Plan to guide the implementation of the Policy. With feedback from the internal team, Living Streets Advisory Group, Transportation Commission, . Planning Commission, and the public, staff had prepared a Living Streets Plan for Council review and approval. Mr. Nolan reviewed Edina's path to Living Streets, plan preparation and input, purpose of the plan, and structure of the plan. A public hearing was not required, but staff felt it was important to provide additional opportunity for public comment. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:45 p.m. Public Testimony Arnie Bigbee, 7621 Edinborough Way, addressed the Council. Diane Rice, 5013 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Council. Joanie Mitchell, 5011 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Council. Carol Cushmore, 5012 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Council. Pat Lawrence, 5015 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Council. Cary Schilling, 5017 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Council. Chris Bremer, 6001 Ewing Avenue South, addressed the Council. Pat Olson, 5002 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Council. . John Hamilton, 6125 Beard Avenue South, addressed the Council. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /May 6, 2015 Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to approve the Living • Streets Plan. The Council each shared their support for the Living Streets Plan and acknowledged the hard work that had gone into it. The Council also noted it would decide at a later time whether or not to revisit parking on both sides of the street on Bruce Avenue. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI1. COMMUNITY COMMENT No one appeared to comment. Vlll. REPORTS / RECOMMENDATIONS VIII.A. 2014 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY FUND SUMMARY REPORT— PRESENTED Mr. Nolan presented a Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund overview, reviewed the 2014 Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund, and discussed 2014 Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund project locations. He also noted that over $750,000 was estimated to roll over from 2014 into 2015 and that rollover amount was projected to decrease in future years with efficient planning and management of the fund. VIII.B. RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -46 ADOPTED — ACCEPTING VARIOUS GRANTS AND DONATIONS 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 Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2015 -46 accepting various grants and donations. Member Brindle seconded the motion. • Rollcall: Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -47 ACCEPTING THREE LIFE -SIZED BRONZED SCULPTURES RESTRICTED DONATION AND AGREEMENT — ADOPTED Tom Shirley, Centennial Lakes Park General Manager, presented the proposal and location of three sculptures. The Edina Community Foundation, through a gift from former Northwest Airline employees, wanted to donate three life -sized bronze sculptures to the City of Edina that would be installed along the lower walkway on the northeast part of Centennial Lakes Park. If accepted, the sculptures would be created and installed by Edina artist Nick Legeros. Mr. Legeros presented models of all three aviation themed pieces. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2015 -47, Accepting Donation and Approving Agreement Centennial Lakes Sculpture Donation. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.D. RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -48 SUPPORTING AFFORDABLY - PRICED HOUSING AT 3330 WEST 66TH STREET — ADOPTED Economic Development Manager Neuendorf presented the request from Beacon Interfaith Housing for general support as well as $550,000.00 in direct financial support from the City to provide gap funding for • the proposed 66 West apartment project located at 3330 West 66th Street. When completed, the project would consist of 39 efficiency apartments targeted as affordably - priced housing for teenagers and young adults who were formerly homeless. The Council discussed the request at its April 7, 201 S Work Session and directed staff to explore the possibility of using incremental taxes from the Southdale 2 TIF District to meet this need. Ehlers & Associates and Dorsey & Whitney have determined that tax increment financing Page 6 Minutes /Edina City Council /May 6, 2015 was a viable means to provide direct financial support to the 66 West project without overburdening pre- existing commitments. Mr. Neuendorf answered questions of the Council relating to rescinding the pledge and the $50,000.00 increase. Member Staunton introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2015 -48, Supporting Affordable- Priced Housing at 3330 West 66th Street. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.E. SOUTHDALE FRANCE WORKING GROUP UPDATE — PRESENTED Michael Schroeder, Southdale France Work Group Member, updated the Council on the Work Group's efforts to date toward creating a set of development principles for the Southdale France Avenue Area. Mr. Schroeder talked about the process with a focus on Stage One; the meetings held including a kick -off meeting, work group meetings, and a check -in meeting; work group dialogue; next steps; and, schedule for the remainder of Stage One. Robb Gruman, Southdale France Work Group Member noted the Group had thoroughly discussed that the work needed to be qualitative instead of quantitative. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS IX.A. CORRESPONDENCE Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council's receipt of various correspondence. IX.B. MINUTES: 1. EDINA COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMISSION, FEBRUARY 3 AND MARCH 3, 2015 2. TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, MARCH 19, 2015 3. HUMAN RIGHTS AND RELATIONS COMMISSION, MARCH 24, 2015 Informational; no action required. X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE — Received XI. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS — Received X11. MANAGER'S COMMENTS — Received XII1. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 11:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, May 19, 2015. • Video Copy of the May 6, 2015, meeting available. Page 7 Debra A. Manger, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL i HELD AT CITY HALL MAY 6, 2015 5:02 P.M. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were: Members Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Edina City Staff attending the meeting: Joe Abood, Braemar Golf Course General Manager; Lindy Crawford, City Management Fellow; Susan Faus, Assistant Director Park & Recreation; Joel Joe Gamer Greupner, Braemar Golf Course Pro; Ann Kattreh, Park & Recreation Director; Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; Debra Mangen, City Clerk; Chad Millner, Engineering Director; Scott Neal, City Manager; Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager; Brian Olson, Public Works Superintendent; Eric Roggeman, Finance Director and Tom Swenson, Braemar Golf Course Maintenance Superintendent. BRAEMAR MASTER PLAN Members of the Braemar Master Plan Task Force attending the meeting included: Pacy Erck, Joseph Hulbert, Rick kefn Ites and Paul Presthus. Richard Mandel, Golf Architecture, the City's consultant for the Braemar Master Plan reviewed his proposed renovation options for the Braemar Golf Course. Mr. Mandel, Council members Braemar Master Plan Task Force members and staff discussed various aspects of the proposed renovations including: a timeline for renovations, inclusion of ecological enhancement, accessibility of the renovated course, costs of renovation, impact on wetlands and how wetlands may drive decisions, whether Braemar should be 27 holes, 18 regulation holes with an executive 9 holes, 18 holes with a practice loop or just 18 holes. The plan will be presented to the Park Board May 12, 2015 and after any revisions it will come before the Council. The Mayor and Council expressed their thanks for the Braemar Master Plan Task Force for the work on developing the Plan. PARK STRATEGIC PLAN Attending the work session was Park Board Chair Dan Gieseke and Member Ellen Jones. Park Director Kattreh introduced Terry Minarek from Confluence who presented to the City Council the Implementation Plan section of the Park Strategic Plan. Mr. Minarek presented the Draft Implementation Plan outlining the vision, mission statement, guiding principles and purpose goals and strategies. Members discussed the draft plan expressing some concern over the use of "recreational" and the potential fiscal impact of certain proposals from the plan. They discussed the timing of some aspects, and when the Council will receive the complete plan, noting that decisions made on some other issues might possibility impact the final strategic plan. Council thank the Park Board for work on this matter and noted the full Park Board will review the Plan at their May 12th meeting after which the revised plan will be presented to the Council. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 0 Minutes approved by Edina City Council, May 6, 2015 Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page - 1 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/7/2015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1300 5/7/2015 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 78.40 370901 1885265 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 50.00 TASTE OF EDINA 370902 1886057 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 128.40 1301 51712015 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 107.76 COFFEE 370798 9513028 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 107.76 1302 517/2015 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 106.50 370905 48061400 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,051.60 370906 48061500 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 230.48 370909 6538500 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 7.24 370799 91902700 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 85.39 370908 91938000 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 7.21 370907 91944600 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 2,488.42 1303 5/7/2015 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 22.13 PENS 370562 OE- 390788 -1 1261.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 489.59 FILING CABINET 00003159 370620 OE- 391748 -1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 48.45 OFFICE SUPPLIES 370617 WO- 111791 -1 1190.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ASSESSING 64.70 FOLDERS 370563 WO- 112146 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 48.45 OFFICE SUPPLIES 370618 WO- 112209 -1 1190.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ASSESSING 25.42 REGISTER ROLLS 370565 WO- 112236 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 157.55 FOLDERS 370564 WO- 112502 -1 1160.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FINANCE 101.17 OFFICE SUPPLIES 370619 WO- 112554 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 24.54 OFFICE SUPPLIES 370709 WO- 113364 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 66.95 OFFICE SUPPLIES 370709 WO- 113364 -1 1180.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ELECTION 1,048.95 1304 5/712015 101375 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS INC. 220.25 DOOR / LOCK REPAIRS 370846 S89855 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 220.25 1305 517/2015 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 169.95 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003595 370710 107761 1470.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 169.95 1306 5/712015 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 285.86 ALTERNATOR, PULLEY 00005259 370663 954683 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 2 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5P712015 — 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1306 51712015 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS Continued... 215.67 ALTERNATOR, CHECK VALVE 00005259 370664 954780 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 233.59 GUIDE ASSEMBLY 00005354 370748 955101 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 735.12 1307 517/2015 100513 COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES INC. 697.29 DEEP CLEANING 370856 7070212705 5410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 697.29 1308 517/2015 104020 DALCO 221.10 HAND TOWELS 00001454 370581 2872860 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 221.10 1309 5/712015 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 420.30 370914 800604 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,106.30 370773 800606 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5,142.37 370915 800607 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 7,668.97 1310 517/2015 100752 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC. 1,546.00 CASTINGS 00001249 370805 UU1661 5932.6536 CASTINGS GENERAL STORM SEWER 1,546.00 1311 51712015 134466 FUTURE IQ PARTNERS 6,250.00 COMMUNITY VISIONING PROJECT 370715 183 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 6,250.00 1312 517/2015 102079 HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC 921.12 WATER LINE REPLACEMENT 00001855 370752 14146 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 921.12 1313 5/7/2015 129508 IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS 604.48 SEND APRIL LATE NOTICES 370813 101841 5902.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE 604.48 1314 5/7/2015 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. 81.05 PVC FITTINGS 00001851 370814 914617 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES 81.05 1315 5/712015 101792 LUBE -TECH 175.00 PICKUP USED OIL FILTERS 370590 622628 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN • • • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 517/2015 - 5/712015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1315 517/2015 101792 LUBE -TECH Continued... 1314.6406 175.00 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1301.6556 TOOLS 1316 517/2015 GENERAL SUPPLIES 101483 MENARDS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1301.6406 77.00 LUMBER FORMS 00001723 370686 61891 97.81 MAILBOX POSTS 00001760 370755 82523 48.80 KNIFE, SHARPIE 00001779 370756 82947 39.99 SELF LEVEL FLOOR UNDERLAY 00001832 370757 83626 43.90 SELECT BOARD 00001880 370758 83909 26.23 PLUMBING REPAIR PARTS 00001881 370687 83910 6.36 DRILL BIT, FUNNEL 00001892 370759 83992 242.46 METAL STUDS, POLY CLEAR 00001906 370761 84144 15.40 METAL STUDS 00001906 370760 84152 597.95 1317 5/7/2015 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 251.37 IRRIGATION PARTS 370725 1006307 -00 251.37 1318 517/2015 129485 PAPCO INC. 99.92 CLEANERS 370828 92566 99.92 1319 517/2016 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 55.00 TIRE REPAIR 370831 210171025 55.00 1320 5/7/2015 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 743.07 TOWELS, LINERS, GLOVES 370878 7730 743.07 1321 5/7/2015 101000 RJM PRINTING INC. 48.50 BUSINESS CARDS 370694 85982 48.50 1322 5/7/2015 101004 SIPS COMPANIES 1,713.56 PIPE, FITTINGS FOR CARWASH 00001657 370836 S3065197.001 39.80 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 00008040 370681 S3069155.001 184.91 PARTS 00001835 370702 S3072225.001 41.89 PLUMBING REPAIR PARTS 00001885 370700 S3073129.001 72.92 PLUMBING REPAIR PARTS 00001882 370701 S3073322.001 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1301.6556 TOOLS 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 47083.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5761.6530 REPAIR PARTS • 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 3 Business Unit STREET RENOVATION SNOW & ICE REMOVAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE UTLEY PK BATHROOM RENOVATION BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE CITY HALL GENERAL CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 7411.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 5553.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES SPORTS DOME BLDG &GROUNDS 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE R55CKR2 LOGIS101 2,287.50 370986 CITY OF EDINA 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 129.00 Council Check Register by GL 370985 0123368 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 752.00 370984 0123369 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 511/2015 - 517/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1322 5/712015 101004 SPS COMPANIES Continued... 119.75 TOILET REPAIR 00001901 370699 S3073944.001 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 135.79 BRASS FITTINGS 00001850 370837 S3075952.001 5913.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 370893 2,308.62 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 1323 5/712015 CONCESSION PRODUCT 101015 STRETCHERS 42320865 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 719.96 UNIFORMS 00003587 370734 11147389 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 204.97 UNIFORMS 00003510 370735 11147502 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 42361735 199.99 UNIFORMS 00003510 370736 11147532 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 192.98 MUNITIONS BAG 370641 11147966 1401.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 5/7/2015 5,578.20 AMMO 370737 11148692 1400.6551 AMMUNITION 6,896.10 1,797.85 370988 391443 -00 1324 5/7/2015 50TH ST SELLING 119454 VINOCOPIA 2,052.30 370987 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 4 Business Unit BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2,287.50 370986 0122869 -IN 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 129.00 370985 0123368 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 752.00 370984 0123369 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 83.00 370983 0123370 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 3,251.50 1325 51712015 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 829.51- 370893 41804800 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 548.51 CONCESSION PRODUCT 370890 42320865 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 665.02 370892 42345704 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 37.50 370891 42361735 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 421.52 1326 5/7/2015 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 1,797.85 370988 391443 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,052.30 370987 391597 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,640.16 370789 391606 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,490.31 393184 51712015 101971 ABLE HOSE & RUBBER LLC 40.84 VINYL TUBING, BALL SEATS 00001800 370659 1- 866061 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 40.84 393185 6/7/2016 100614 ACE SUPPLY CO. INC. 83.50 DUCTWORK 00001828 370796 384365 450003.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE DEPT MECH INSULATION 83.50 • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 5 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/712015 — 5/712015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393186 5/7/2015 105476 ACE TRAILER SALES Continued... 495.00 HITCH PARTS 00003594 370797 34464 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 495.00 393187 5/7/2015 129468 ACME TOOLS 149.00 RATCHET KIT 00005312 370660 3344416 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 149.00 393188 5/7/2015 121667 ADVANCED FIRST AID INC. 52.00 AED EQUIPMENT 370841 0315 -019 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 52.00 393189 517/2015 101166 AHEAD INC 2,044.22 MERCHANDISE 370842 INV0236728 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1,203.38 370843 INV0237564 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 3,247.60 393190 51712015 101601 AMUNDSON, ERIK 218.00 ACFE CLASS FEE 370707 042915 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 218.00 393191 5/712015 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 880.00 370903 3029591 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 160.00 370769 3029592 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,616.00 370904 3029594 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,146.05 370768 3029595 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,802.05 393192 517/2015 118955 BCBS OF MN 1,133.96 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 370661 MARIAN REID 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,133.96 393193 517/2015 102709 BIDS LAUNDRY SYSTEMS 233.78 COMMERCIAL WASHER REPAIR 370708 SO10086897 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 233.78 393194 5/712016 136234 BEATT, DAVID K. 1,383.10 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 370616 042815 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,383.10 393195 5/7/2015 126139 BERNICK'S R55CKR2 LOGIS101 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CITY OF EDINA 5862.5513 5/5/2015 11:25:47 VERNON SELLING 393196 Council Check Register by GL CITY COUNCIL Page- 6 473.70 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 925921162 126.95 COFFEE 370662 517/2015 - 517/2015 925927400 5440.5511 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393195 517/2015 125139 BERNICK'S 127340 BIDDLE CONSULTING GROUP INC. Continued... 40.00 370770 215100 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 579.60 370771 215102 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 113.90 370910 215103 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 128.70 370844 215133 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 393201 5/7/2015 122318 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 125.00 ROOM RENTAL FEE 370711 2463 125.00 393202 517/2015 103239 BRIN NORTHWESTERN GLASS CO. 195.00 DOOR REPAIR 370847 528178S 195.00 393203 517/2015 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 1552.6406 2310.6230 1322.6406 5912.6180 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT E911 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL WELL HOUSES 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 862.20 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 393196 517/2015 CITY COUNCIL 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 473.70 370850 925921162 126.95 COFFEE 370662 T80443 925927400 5440.5511 126.95 393197 517/2016 127340 BIDDLE CONSULTING GROUP INC. 646.70 CRITICALL ELITE MAINTENANCE 370845 46778 646.70 393198 51712015 119153 BLACKBURN MFG. CO. 185.82 LOCATE MARKER FLAGS 00001783 370747 0485397 -IN 185.82 393199 51712015 131681 BOSTROM SHEET METAL WORKS INC. 6,214.10 EXHAUST REPAIR 00001856 370800 1025 6,214.10 393200 51712015 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 348.50 370911 126205 270.00 370772 126206 393201 5/7/2015 122318 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 125.00 ROOM RENTAL FEE 370711 2463 125.00 393202 517/2015 103239 BRIN NORTHWESTERN GLASS CO. 195.00 DOOR REPAIR 370847 528178S 195.00 393203 517/2015 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 1552.6406 2310.6230 1322.6406 5912.6180 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT E911 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL WELL HOUSES 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1100.6106 MEETING EXPENSE CITY COUNCIL 5420.6530 834.75 MERCHANDISE 370848 925911458 5440.5511 70.90 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 370849 925911515 5440.5511 473.70 370850 925921162 5440.5511 185.18 370851 925927400 5440.5511 • • REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES • VOIS101 R55CKR2 CITY OF• A 5/5/2 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 7 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/712015 - 517/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393203 5/7/2015 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF Continued... 1,955.35 RENTAL CLUBS 370852 925928635 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 185.40 RENTAL CLUBS 370853 925931368 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 105.16 RENTAL CLUBS 370854 925941009 5424.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RANGE 3,810.44 393204 5/712015 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 387.75 370912 568368 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 3,665.00 370913 569182 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 4,052.75 393206 617/2015 129923 CAWLEY 37.94 NAME BADGES 370621 V287714 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 10.08 NAME BADGES 370713 V288438 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 18.03 NAME BADGES 370712 V288451 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 66.05 393206 5/7/2015 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 73.38 10089900 -4 370572 10089900 -4/15 1646.6186 HEAT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1,338.05 5546504 -1 370574 5546504 -4/15 1470.6186 HEAT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 4,331.11 55638274 370570 5563827 -4/15 5210.6186 HEAT GOLF DOME PROGRAM 908.93 5584304 -9 370568 5584304 -4/15 7411.6186 HEAT PSTF OCCUPANCY 27.63 5584310 -6 370566 5584310 -4/15 7413.6166 HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER 31.54 5590919 -6 370567 55909194/15 7413.6562 FUEL OIL PSTF FIRE TOWER 3,430.46 55914584 370573 5591458 -4/15 1551.6186 HEAT CITY HALL GENERAL 99.65 5596524 -8 370571 5596524 -4/15 5430.6166 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 1,202.80 8034001 -1 370569 8034001 -4/15 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING 50.29 9546705 -6 370665 9546705 -4/15 5911.6186 HEAT WELL PUMPS 11,493.84 393207 51712015 117433 CENTURY FENCE CO. 1,415.00 GATE REPAIRS 370575 9696C00 5914.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR 1,415.00 393208 5/7/2015 123898 CENTURYLINK 123.86 952 831 -0024 370578 00244/15 1552.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SVC PW BUILDING 57.56 952 920 -1586 370577 1586 -4/15 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 70.17 952 922 -2444 370576 2444 -4/15 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 57.56 952 920 -8632 370667 86324/15 5911.6188 TELEPHONE WELL PUMPS 54.89 952 922 -9246 370666 9246 -4/15 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 130.59 952 920 -9996 E911 370622 9996 -4/15 2310.6188 TELEPHONE E911 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 517/2015 — 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393208 5/7/2015 123898 CENTURYLINK Continued... 0 0 MEETING EXPENSE PLUMBING PERMITS GENERALSUPPLIES CONSTR. IN PROGRESS CONSTR. IN PROGRESS CONTRACTED REPAIRS TOOLS TOOLS TOOLS TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 8 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL INSPECTIONS DARE SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY 50TH STREET RUBBISH • 494.63 393209 5/7/2015 118580 CITY OF EDINA 80.00 VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION 370855 RECEPTION 1400.6106 80.00 393210 517/2016 136253 CITYWIDE PLUMBING LLC 27.50 ED138835 PERMIT REFUND 371014 6400 YORK AVE 1495.4112 27.50 393211 5/7/2015 122132 CREATIVE PRODUCT SOURCING INC. - DARE 58.50 DARE SUPPLIES 370668 83866 1425.6406 58.50 393212 5/7/2015 129650 CUNINGHAM GROUP ARCHITECTURE 11,536.15 CONSRUCTION MANAGEMENT 370579 42817 5550.1705 82.36 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 370580 42819 5550.1705 11,618.51 393213 5/7/2015 133169 DAIKIN APPLIED 128.60 DEHUMIDIFIER REPAIRS 370857 3046507 5511.6180 126.60 393214 51712015 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 106.39 METRIC TOOLS 00005190 370669 998020 1553.655E 165.33 PROBE, METRIC SET 00005314 370670 999006 1553.655E 46.10 PLIERS 00005314 370671 999059 1553.655E 317.82 393215 5/7/2015 121161 DEX MEDIA 21.40 PHONE LISTING 370623 041615 5821.618E 21.40 PHONE LISTING 370623 041615 5841.618E 21.40 PHONE LISTING 370623 041615 5861.618E 64.20 393216 6/7/2016 123995 DICK'S /LAKEVILLE SANITATION INC. 5,708.87 MAY 2015 REFUSE 371013 1096641 4095.610 5,708.87 393217 5/7/2016 118806 DISCOUNT STEEL INC. 0 0 MEETING EXPENSE PLUMBING PERMITS GENERALSUPPLIES CONSTR. IN PROGRESS CONSTR. IN PROGRESS CONTRACTED REPAIRS TOOLS TOOLS TOOLS TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 8 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL INSPECTIONS DARE SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY 50TH STREET RUBBISH • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/712015 — 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393217 5/7/2015 118805 DISCOUNT STEEL INC. Continued... 122.50 STEEL PLATE 370801 01089825 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 122.50 393218 517/2015 131298 DOMACE VINO LLC 0 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 9 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 393219 5/712015 134945 DOMINO, CARRIE 28.56 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371018 2014 1170.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE HUMAN RESOURCES 28.56 393220 5/7/2015 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC. 94.44 PUBLISH NOTICE 370583 209645 1185.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS _231.80 PUBLISH NOTICE 370582 209646 1185.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS 326.24 393221 517/2015 102758 ELDER -JONES BLDG PERMIT SERIVCE INC 259.36 ED136800 PERMIT REFUND 371015 4812 HIBISCUS 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS INSPECTIONS 259.36 393222 51712015 102865 ELECTION SYSTEMS & SOFTWARE INC 41.94 THERMAL PAPER 370584 927683 1180.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ELECTION 41.94 393223 5/712015 122792 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC. 1,893.80 TRAFFIC CAR UNIT 13 UPGRADE 370625 AW031315 -4A 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 2,014.50 SOUNDOFF LIGHTBARS 370624 AW041615 -13 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 3,908.30 393224 517/2015 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC. 42.50 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003517 370804 1732256 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 21.25 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003518 370803 1732266 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,869.89 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003519 370602 1732530 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,933.64 393225 6/7/2015 134966 EMSAR MIDWEST 337.92 COT MAINTENANCE 370714 SI -15440 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 337.92 393226 617/2015 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/712015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393226 6/7/2016 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY Continued... 42.44 ROTOR ASSEMBLY 370806 1- 4688116 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 249.90 BATTERIES 00005150 370675 1- Z04244 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 116.79 SPARK PLUGS, COILASSEMBLY 370587 69- 175798 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 173.42 ROTORS 370585 69- 175816 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 84.94 BATTERY 370673 69- 176174 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13.08 ELEMENTASSEMBLY 370674 69- 176243 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 40.76 SENSOR 370807 69- 176321 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 68.94 BATTERY 370672 69- 176336 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 31.87 BEAMS, REAR BLADE 370749 69- 176468 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 118.44 PAD KIT 370586 70- 228710 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 940.58 - 393227 517/2015 122649 FARNER - BOCKEN COMPANY 23.15- 370859 3895554 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 464.85 CONCESSION PRODUCT 370858 3904190 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 36.35- 370860 3912028 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 405.35 393228 617/2015 135865 FAST PRINT 84.00 ART CENTER POSTCARDS 370626 12597 5110.6575 PRINTING 84.00 393229 5/7/2016 106035 FASTENAL COMPANY 36.58 THREADED ROD 00005233 370808 MNTC2130256 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 36.58 393230 5/712015 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 1,769.46 METERS 00001854 370676 0132381 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 102.72 METER CAPS 00001854 370677 0132386 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,872.18 393231 517 /2015 122077 FIELDS, DEBRA 12.10 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 370809 043015 7411.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 15.86 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 370809 043015 7410.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 23.69 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 370809 043015 7410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 51.65 393232 517/2016 106351 FOSTER, REBECCA 54.71 REFRESHMENTS 370861 REIMBURSE 1550.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 54.71 0 • 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page- 10 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN METER REPAIR METER REPAIR PSTF OCCUPANCY PSTF ADMINISTRATION PSTF ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL • • i • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 11 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/7/2015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393232 517/2015 106351 FOSTER, REBECCA Continued... 393233 5/7/2015 100764 G & K SERVICES 101.37 ACCT # 0039263 LAUNDRY 370862 1013867412 5421.6201 LAUNDRY GRILL 101.37 393234 5/7/2015 136241 GALLAGHER MD, JOHN M. 150.00 PARAMEDIC TRAINING 370716 PRESENTATION 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 150.00 393235 5/7/2015 136229 GARCIA, SANTIAGO 206.00 CLASS REFUND 370627 13990 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 206.00 393236 517/2015 123080 GARDENVIEW GREENHOUSE 304.00 FLOWERS 370863 668955 5422.6275 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 304.00 393237 5/7/2015 100775 GENERAL SPORTS CORPORATION 1,686.50 GOAL POST PADS 370864 88950 5553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SPORTS DOME BLDG &GROUNDS 1,686.50 393238 517/2015 103185 GERTENS 688.00 TREES 00001838 370678 344884/1 1644.6541 PLANTINGS & TREES TREES & MAINTENANCE 688.00 393239 5/7/2015 129838 GLOWING HEARTH & HOME 143.39 ED137302 PERMIT REFUND 371016 5809 NORTHWOOD 1495.4115 MECHANICAL PERMITS INSPECTIONS DR 143.39 393240 51712015 101103 GRAINGER 37.62 PENS 00001806 370810 9718513931 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 37.31 EXIT SIGNS 00005232 370751 9719060551 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 305.55 PAPER PLATES 00005232 370751 9719060551 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 383.88 PAINT 00001833 370679 9719341910 5913.6532 PAINT DISTRIBUTION 143.37 HYDRANT PAINT 00001903 370750 9724040416 5913.6532 PAINT DISTRIBUTION 907.73 393241 5/712015 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 1,824.75 370918 181007 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 12 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/7/2015 — 5/712015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393241 51712015 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC Continued... 228.50 370917 181010 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,053.25 393242 5/7/2015 100783 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. INC. 590.88 BULBS 00002376 370717 978455473 5765.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PROMENADE EXPENSES 590.88 393243 617 /2015 100784 GRAZZINI BROTHERS AND CO. 565.75 EDINA LIQUORS 370588 50TH REMODEL 5821.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 565.75 393244 5/712015 134391 GRIMES, LAURYN 78.49 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 370718 043015 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 78.49 393245 51712015 100788 H &L MESABI 4,020.00 CURB RUNNERS 00005074 370811 93297 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 4,020.00 393246 517/2015 102060 HALLOCK COMPANY INC 33.48 LIGHTS 00001904 370812 141475 -1 5921.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 33.48 393247 617/2015 100797 HAWKINS INC. 3,320.27 CHEMICALS 00001246 370589 3717033 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 3,320.27 393248 517/2015 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 7,092.25 MAR 2015 ROOM & BOARD 371019 1000059662 1195.6225 BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES 7,092.25 393249 5/712015 103838 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE 1,050.00 FAO TRAINING 370719 00332700 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,050.00 393260 517/2016 105962 HOFF, BRUCE 108.00 INSTRUCTION 370865 050115 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 108.00 393251 51712015 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. • • 0 r 126816 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES • GENERAL SUPPLIES • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 370680 6311295 CITY OF EDINA 38.64 5/5/2015 11:25:47 371020 MARCH 2015 1301.6530 Council Check Register by GL Page- 13 MARCH 2015 47083.6710 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 393256 5/7/2015 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 393253 5/7/2015 5/712015' - 5/7/2015 7,750.45 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393251 5/7/2015 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 370779 2349495 Continued... 393254 517/2015 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE 1,699.00 370775 757204 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 370628 1,130.00 370774 759318 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 042515- LIQUOR 1,091.00 370919 759347 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1400.6406 2,604.75 370920 759669 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 393252 5/7/2015 126816 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES 5.14 COBBLESTONE 00001613 370680 6311295 1551.6406 38.64 5101.4413 371020 MARCH 2015 1301.6530 61.53 371020 MARCH 2015 47083.6710 105.31 393256 5/7/2015 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 393253 5/7/2015 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY 7,750.45 2,115.00 2349494 370921 28563 5842.5514 2,115.00 370779 2349495 5862.5515 393254 517/2015 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE 90.00 370777 4.79 BROOM HANDLE 370628 042515- LIQUOR 5841.6406 7.18 WIRE HOOKS 370628 042515- LIQUOR 5821.6406 25.94 80.00 370720 042515 - POLICE 1400.6406 1239 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 370721 4/25/15 -FIRE 1495.6406 104.19 2356977 370721 4/25/15 -FIRE 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL REPAIR PARTS GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT UTLEY PK BATHROOM RENOVATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 393255 5/7/2015 136249 JIMENEZ, DAREK 26.00 ART WORK SOLD 370866 050115 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 26.00 393256 5/7/2015 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 7,750.45 370778 2349494 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 57.80 370779 2349495 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 90.00 370777 2349501 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 12,105.89 370922 2349502 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 80.00 370776 2349503 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 22240 370867 2356977 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 198.60 370868 2364656 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 20,505.14 393257 517/2015 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 159.30 370780 5144491 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/712015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393257 5/712015 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. Continued... 1,149.41 370950 5149415 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 372.68 370949 5149416 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 2.90 370923 5149417 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 1.16 370932 5149418 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 290.61 370948 5149420 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 97.16 370937 5149421 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 788.31 370947 5149422 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 2,515.18 370946 5149424 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 1,772.58 370955 5149425 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 93.32 370941 5149426 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 6,114.96 370927 5149428 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 194.32 370954 5149430 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 210.32 370953 5149431 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 651.25 370945 5149432 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 2.32 370929 5149433 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 5,727.16 370952 5149435 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1,860.62 370926 5149437 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 115.45 370925 5149438 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 1,763.58 370924 5149439 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 11,549.91 370944 5149440 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 3,861.32 370951 5149441 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1,854.94 370930 5149442 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1,414.64 370928 5149443 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 747.26 370943 5149444 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 5,800.56 370938 5149445 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 21.99 370939 5149446 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 691.16 370935 5149448 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 2,119.04 370936 5149449 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 992.93 370934 5149450 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 5,052.60 370940 5149451 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 3.48 370942 5149452 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 3,126.56 370931 5149454 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 1,733.75 370933 5149455 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 25.45- 370781 521643 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 6.21- 370957 524273 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 5.56- 370956 524274 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 62, 815.51 393258 5/7/2015 111018 KEEPRS INC. 266.36 UNIFORMS 00003597 370723 269753 -90 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 0 • 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 14 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL • 0 ! • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 15 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5!7/2015 — 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393258 5/7/2015 111018 KEEPRS INC. Continued... 24.99 UNIFORMS 00003591 370722 275187 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 291.35 393259 517/2015 113212 KENDELL DOORS & HARDWARE INC. 27.42 KEYS 00001891 370681 S1019031 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 27.42 393260 517/2015 133810 KNOWBE4 LLC 2,25D.00 SECURITY TESTING/TRAINING 370815 REN -04100 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 2,250.00 393261 5/712015 134675 KOSKINEN, MATTHEW 96.03 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 370629 042815 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 96.03 393262 517/2015 130042 KULLY SUPPLY INC. 77.67 REBUILD KIT 00001894 370682 SI- 330680 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 14.56 STOP REPAIR KIT 00001894 370683 SI- 330795 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 92.23 393263 5/7/2015 133189 LANDMARK BUILDING CONTRACTORS 2,500.00 ED137054 ESCROW REFUND 370817 4237 ALDEN DR 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 ED138155 ESCROW REFUND 370821 5402 ABBOTT PL 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 ED133484 ESCROW REFUND 370816 5508 DEVER DR 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 ED135192 ESCROW REFUND 370818 5804 ZENITH AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 ED132543 ESCROW REFUND 370820 5837 YORK AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 ED131248 ESCROW REFUND 370819 5908 GRIMES AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 15, 000.00 393264 5/7/2015 124611 LARSCO INC. 1,933.00 PUMPS 00001737 370684 3363 5911.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL PUMPS 1,933.00 393265 51712015 136231 LARSON, DEB 350.00 MARKETING CONSULTANT 370630 EDINA LIQUORS 5820.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET GENERAL 400.00 MARKETING CONSULTANT 370630 EDINA LIQUORS 5860.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 600.00 MARKETING CONSULTANT 370630 EDINA LIQUORS 5840.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 1,350.00 393266 5/7/2015 100862 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. R55CKR2 LOGIS101 292.41 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 393272 6/7/2015 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS Council Check Register by GL Page- 16 1,635.25 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 042115 1628.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,635.25 5/7/2015 — 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393266 5/7/2015 385,231.33 100862 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 370900 0001044178 Continued... SEWER SERVICE METRO 404.11 DRILL BITS, SCREWS, WASHERS 00005192 370753 9303233213 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 393274 5/7/2015 404.11 104660 MICRO CENTER 393267 51712015 79.98 102722 LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY 370591 5461157 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 244.00 MARIJUANA TEST KITS 370685 301955 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 244.00 DRIVES FOR FORENSICS 00004333 370593 5539011 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 393268 5/7/2015 219.98 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. 393275 5/7/2016 151.15 BEARING CUPS AND CONES 00005262 370754 2152973 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 285.30 BEARING CONES, CUPS, SEALS 00005263 370822 2153007 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 436.45 393269 517/2015 105677 MAGC 10.00 WORKSHOP - KAYLIN EIDSNESS 370724 15JWEDN 1130.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS COMMUNICATIONS 10.00 393270 617/2016 136260 MATTSON, JAANA 165.00 CRAFT SUPPLIES 370869 050115 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 165.00 393271 6/7/2015 131867 MAXX SUNGLASSES 292.41 SUNGLASSES 370870 227362 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES • 0 SENIOR CITIZENS SEWER TREATMENT COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER REVENUES • 292.41 393272 6/7/2015 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 1,635.25 COMO PK/RAPTOR CENTER TRIP 370823 042115 1628.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,635.25 393273 6/7/2015 100887 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERV 385,231.33 JUNE 2015 SEWER SERVICE 370900 0001044178 5922.6302 SEWER SERVICE METRO 385,231.33 393274 5/7/2015 104660 MICRO CENTER 79.98 370591 5461157 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 79.98- 370592 5473602 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 219.98 DRIVES FOR FORENSICS 00004333 370593 5539011 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 219.98 393275 5/7/2016 136230 MIDDENDORF, WENDY 109.00 ART CENTER CLASS REFUND 370631 13384 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION • 0 SENIOR CITIZENS SEWER TREATMENT COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER REVENUES • • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 17 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/7/2015 — 517/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393275 5/7/2015 136230 MIDDENDORF, WENDY Continued... 109.00 393276 5/7/2016 134387 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC. 167.24 VETERANS MEMORIAL MAILING 370688 74466 47073.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT VETERANS MEMORIAL 167.24 393277 617/2015 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & WATER 2,000.00 SEWERM/ATER SERVICE 00002667 370657 34929 05551.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN Arden Park D Reconstruction 4,425.00 SEWER/WATER SERVICE 00002667 370657 34929 03487.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN Arden Park D Reconstruction 6,425.00 393278 617/2015 136248 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT 20.80 WHEELS FOR MOWER 00001929 370824 P73576 1641.6530 REPAIR PARTS MOWING 20.80 393279 5/7/2015 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 43.65 ELBOW, HOSE, CAP 00005274 370594 0109055 -IN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 43.65 393280 6/712015 103974 MN WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 650.00 CALIBRATE HAENNI SCALES 370632 001 - 00003504 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 650.00 393281 6/7/2016 101696 MSP COMMUNICATIONS 2,472.85 MN GOLFER MAGAZINE AD 370871 2015 -41325 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 2,472.85 393282 5/7/2015 130266 MUNICODE 1,407.50 CITY CODE UPDATES 370825 00254955 1185.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS 1,407.50 393283 5/7/2016 104350 NIKE USA INC. 1,085.43 STAFF SHIRTS 370872 970874550 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 1,085.43 393284 517/2016 132509 NOLAN, MARK 1,087.15 APA CONFERENCE EXPENSES 370826 042915 1262.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRANSPORTATION 1,087.15 393285 5/712015 102138 NORTHERN WINDS CONCERT BAND R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 18 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/7/2015 - 517/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393285 517/2015 102138 NORTHERN WINDS CONCERT BAND Continued... 75.00 EP CONCERT 5/10/15 370726 042815 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 75.00 393286 5/712015 120166 NORTHSTAR CHAPTER APA 75.00 FLSA EVENT REGISTRATION OOMEMBER 370873 CARRIE DOMINO 1170.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS HUMAN RESOURCES 75.00 393287 517/2015 101659 ORKIN 110.00 PEST CONTROL 370633 101261567 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 20.00 PEST CONTROL 370690 101902123 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP 65.00 PEST CONTROL 370689 101902124 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 20.00 PEST CONTROL 370691 101902125 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP 215.00 393288 5/712015 103624 P & L AUTOMOTIVE INC. 359.00 WINDOW TINTING 370634 270588 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 359.00 370635 270602 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 718.00 393289 5/712015 136189 P &W GOLF SUPPLY LLC 171.77 GREEN PLASTIC PAILS 370874 325892 5424.6590 RANGE BALLS RANGE 171.77 393290 6/7/2015 104950 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC. 210.00 LEAD WIPES 370827 1500307 7412.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF RANGE 210.00 393291 517/2015 100347 PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY 2,677.36 370958 8496769 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,335.84 370959 6496776 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 725.28 370782 8496779 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 133.25 370829 8496783 -IN 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 403.75 370960 8497030 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5,275.48 393292 6/7/2016 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 405.35 370875 36626062 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 663.58 370876 36626125 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 1,020.64 370727 36626138 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 2,089.57 0 0 • 393295 0 100953 PHYSIO- CONTROL INC. • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 LIFEPAK MAINTENANCE 370728 415049189 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 264.00 Council Check Register by GL 5/7/2015 Page- 19 134007 PJ TAILORS & CLEANERS Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 36.00 LAUNDER BLANKETS 370877 1728 1400.6201 5/712015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393292 517/2015 10" TEE 00001890 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 0064890 -IN 5915.6103 Continued... 827.60 393293 5/7/2015 122417 PETTY CASH 393298 5/7/2015 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 38.02 SUPPLIES 370830 043015 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 38.02 393299 5/7/2015 393294 5/7/2015 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 987.87 REFINISH DRINKING FOUNTAINS 00001826 370692 22590 208.00 370963 2776868 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 244.51 370967 2780190 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 526.96 370966 2780191 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 85.16 370973 2780192 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3.48 370969 2780193 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 457.80 370962 2780194 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 265.73 370968 2780195 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 956.76 370965 2780196 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,495.50 370961 2780198 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,498.46 370970 2780199 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 884.36 370964 2780200 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,016.41 370974 2780201 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 329.30 370972 2780202 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,693.01 370971 2780203 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 393295 517/2015 100953 PHYSIO- CONTROL INC. 264.00 LIFEPAK MAINTENANCE 370728 415049189 1470.6180 264.00 393296 5/7/2015 134007 PJ TAILORS & CLEANERS 36.00 LAUNDER BLANKETS 370877 1728 1400.6201 36.00 393297 51712015 100957 PLANT & FLANGED EQUIPMENT 827.60 10" TEE 00001890 370595 0064890 -IN 5915.6103 827.60 393298 5/7/2015 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 220.00 STANDARD MAIL PI 3932 370729 PERMIT3932 1130.6123 220.00 393299 5/7/2015 101811 PREMIER FLEET SERVICES 987.87 REFINISH DRINKING FOUNTAINS 00001826 370692 22590 1646.6530 CONTRACTED REPAIRS LAUNDRY FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WATER TREATMENT MAGAZINE /NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 393307 5/7/2015 5/5/2015 11:25:47 99.94 Council Check Register by GL 370597 Page- 20 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 176.91 RECEIVER TUBE, BALL MOUNT 00005313 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 28.97 RECEIVER TUBE 00005313 370832 1927634222 1553.6530 5!7/2015 — 5/7/2015 305.82 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393299 5/712015 MUSIC IN EDINA 101811 PREMIER FLEET SERVICES JULY 12 2611.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Continued... 987.87 393300 51712015 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY 133.49 GLOVES 00005273 370596 55885 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 133.49 393301 517/2015 101014 PRO MEDIA - STREFF MARKETING GROUP 1,127.14 MEETING PEN & PENCIL SETS 370636 226641 1100.6106 MEETING EXPENSE CITY COUNCIL 1,127.14 393302 5/7/2015 125056 PRONTO HEATING AND AIR COND 37.46 PERMIT REFUND 370637 ED139195 1495.4112 PLUMBING PERMITS INSPECTIONS 37.46 393303 5/7/2015 123078 QUALIFIED LABORATORIES INC. 628.29 EKCOSCREEN 00001738 370693 54447 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 628.29 393304 5/7/2015 100975 RED WING SHOE STORE 175.00 SAFETY BOOTS 370762 2680000001367 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE 169.99 SAFETY BOOTS 370762 2680000001367 5730.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 344.99 393306 61712015 136232 REVISION LLC 2,500.00 ED135709 ESCROW REFUND 370638 5505 MERRITT 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS CIRCLE 2,500.00 393306 5/7/2015 118946 RICHFIELD SYMPHONIC BAND 150.00 EP CONCERT 5/03/15 370730 042815 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 393307 5/7/2015 102408 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED 99.94 TRAILER END, TOW RING ASSEMBL-90005257 370597 1927632316 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 176.91 RECEIVER TUBE, BALL MOUNT 00005313 370833 1927634221 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 28.97 RECEIVER TUBE 00005313 370832 1927634222 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 305.82 393308 517/2015 136228 RISTROM, DAN 400.00 MUSIC IN EDINA 370639 JULY 12 2611.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES • is EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MUSIC IN EDINA is • s • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 21 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 517/2015 — 5/712015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393308 517/2015 136228 RISTROM, DAN Continued... 400.00 393309 5/7/2015 133755 RONNING, ERIK 182.00 POTTERY MAINTENANCE 370695 042815 5111.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 168.00 POTTERY MAINTENANCE 370879 050115 5111.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 350.00 393310 5/7/2015 136236 ROSSI, ALEX 500.00 MUSIC IN EDINA 370696 JULY 31 2611.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MUSIC IN EDINA 500.00 393311 5/712015 136235 SALVERSON, DARLENE 1,508.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 370640 042815 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,508.00 393312 517/2015 101822 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT 135.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 370598 2015 - MEMEBER 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 135.00 393313 517/2015 100995 SEH 4,832.87 ANTENNA PROJECTS 370658 296528 1001.4722 RENTAL OF PROPERTY GENERAL FUND REVENUES 4,832.87 393314 5/7/2015 101380 SHAUGHNESSY, SANDRA 13.94 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 370697 042815 5110.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 28.52 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 370697 042815 5110.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 33.52 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 370697 042815 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 75.98 393315 5/7/2015 120784 SIGN PRO 47.50 SIGNS 00001856 370698 8999 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 185.00 DASHERBOARD 370731 9020 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 185.00- CREDIT FOR INV PAID TWICE 370732 INV #8643 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 47.50 393316 617/2015 131885 SISINNI FOOD SERVICES INC. 79.36 HOT DOG BUNS 370880 263839 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 79.36 393317 51712015 132195 SMALL LOT MN R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 22 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/712015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393317 5/7/2015 132195 SMALL LOT MN Continued... 443.75 370783 2448 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 443.75 393318 517/2015 100430 SNAP -ON INDUSTRIAL 82.35 HOSE CLAMP PLIERS 00005229 370599 ARV/25495519 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 207.52 JUMPSTARTER 00005229 370599 ARV/25495519 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 31.17 SOCKETS 00005069 370834 ARV/25553652 5913.6556 TOOLS DISTRIBUTION 321.04 393319 617/2015 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY 2,385.00 CRITICAL INCIDENT MGMT CLASS 370733 82.1 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2,385.00 393320 5/7/2015 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 863.25 370978 1276882 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING .75 370981 1276884 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING .75 370979 1279201 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 601.72 370980 1279203 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING .75 370784 1279204 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 7,246.15 370982 1279205 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 10,144.19 370975 1279206 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5,313.19 370976 1279208 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 13,073.43 370977 1279209 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 188.50 370785 1279210 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 500.00- 370835 9055954 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 400.00- 370835 9055954 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 100.00- 370835 9055954 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 36,432.68 393321 5/712015 136254 SPOTTS, DONALD 1,396.98 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 371017 040415 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,396.98 393322 5/712015 102251 ST. ANDREWS PRODUCTS CO 157.74 LACES 370882 0000750071 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 157.74 393323 51712015 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 218.40 370786 5192 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 218.40 • 0 • • 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 23 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES FINANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS CITY COUNCIL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN RESERVE PROGRAM EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM POLICE DEPT. GENERAL • 0 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/7/2015 -- 517/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393323 5/712015 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC Continued... 393324 517/2015 136103 STILLMAN, NORTON 33.90 ART WORK SOLD 370883 050115 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 33.90 393326 6/7/2015 102262 STRATEGIC INSIGHTS INC. 1,350.00 CIP SOFTWARE 370600 15PLAN -IT -097 1160.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,350.00 393326 617/2015 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. 112.00 TIRES 00005351 370764 10132245 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES 303.70 TIRES 00005352 370763 10132256 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES 415.70 393327 5/7/2015 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 35.10 370788 890493 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 2,897.95 370787 890494 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 2,933.05 393326 517/2015 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL INC. 298.00 4/07/15 COUNCIL MEETING 370601 M21247 1185.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 298.00 393329 5/712016 136225 TIN FISH 539.43 VOLUNTEER DINNER EVENT 370838 51 -BAL DUE 1100.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 539.43 393330 5/7/2015 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 19.14 HOSE 00005189 370704 10076159 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES 194.88 ELECTRODES, BRUSH, ARGON 00001834 370703 10076753 1301.6556 TOOLS 19.14- CREDIT 370706 10077125 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES 36.65 FITTINGS, HOSE 00005194 370705 10077127 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES 231.53 393331 517/2015 101051 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 153.00 UNIFORMS 370642 033115 1419.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 279.44 UNIFORMS 370642 033115 1401.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 6,515.65 UNIFORMS 370642 033115 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 6,948.09 • 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 23 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES FINANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS CITY COUNCIL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN RESERVE PROGRAM EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/7/2015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393332 517/2015 135933 VAN GILDER, BILL Continued... 1,980.83 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 370884 050115 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,980.83 393333 5/7/2015 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 207.04 CAN LINERS 00001771 370738 344954 -02 1645.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 527.04 LIQUOR BAGS, TOWELS 370885 345697 -00 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 147.03 CUPS 370886 345905 -00 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 105.42 TOWELS 370887 346258 -00 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 244.41 TISSUE, TOWELS, SOAP 370888 346292 -00 5420.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 1,230.94 393334 517/2015 133470 VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA 2,830.00 MAY 2015 SERVICE 370889 37813 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,830.00 393335 5/712015 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 8.97 INSULATED HUBS 00001795 370741 9239072 1642.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10.47 CONTACT BLOCK 00001812 370739 9240794 5915.6530 REPAIR PARTS 28.54 POWER SCOREBOARD PANEL 00001895 370740 9263237 1642.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 263.39 LED LIGHTS FOR MAILBOX 00001897 370765 9264154 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 311.37 393336 517/2016 101067 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 40.32 SAFETY GLASSES 00005153 370742 3046000 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 40.32 393337 5/7/2015 133629 VON HANSONS MEATS 109.53 BRATS 370894 84841 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 109.53 393338 517/2015 103088 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN 629.11 WASTE DISPOSAL 370895 7125496 5511.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 629.11 393339 517/2015 136243 WELSH FACILITY SERVICES 27.50 ED138897 PERMIT REFUND 370743 5025 FRANCE AVE 1495.4112 PLUMBING PERMITS 27.50 393340 5/7/2015 105287 WEMYSS, SCOTT D. 104.00 ACCOUNTABILITY BOARDS 00003596 370744 117 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES • • 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Page - 24 Business Unit ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION LITTER REMOVAL YORK SELLING GRILL CLUB HOUSE CLUB HOUSE ARENA ADMINISTRATION FIELD MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT FIELD MAINTENANCE CITY HALL GENERAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS INSPECTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL • . • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 25 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/712015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393340 517/2015 105287 WEMYSS, SCOTT D. Continued... 104.00 393341 517/2015 127990 WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CENTER 165.00 EDINBOROUGH PARK PROGRAM 370766 7848 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 165.00 393342 5/7/2015 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 3,100.00 370790 7024322 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 129.16 370839 7027514 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 313.16 370990 7028175 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,444.92 370991 7028178 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,272.92 370989 7028179 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 7,260.16 393343 5/7/2015 130471 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 1,157.06 FUNGICIDE 00002378 370745 60015246 5761.6540 FERTILIZER CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 1,157.06 393344 517/2015 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 3,201.22 371005 1080314275 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 635.75 370998 1080314279 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5,644.68 370999 1080314282 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 3,121.00 371000 1080314284 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 947.30 371001 1080314285 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 339.17 370793 1080315099 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 8,311.32 371004 1080316877 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,821.72 370995 1080316878 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5,915.54 370994 1080316879 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,085.27 370996 1080316881 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,262.44 370997 1080316882 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 818.05 371003 1080316883 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5,670.43 370992 1080316974 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD VINE YORK SELLING 199.14 370791 1080316975 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 15,376.55 371002 1080316977 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 3,842.11 370792 1080316978 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 805.17 370993 1080317790 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 63, 996.86 393345 5/7/2015 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 477.50 370795 1090395023 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 26 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 517/2015 - 5/7/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393345 5/712015 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC Continued... 416.00 370794 1090395024 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,207.55 371008 1090395810 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 123.00 371006 1090398336 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 4,315.12 371012 1090398383 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 69.30 371011 1090398384 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,539.85 371007 1090398385 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5,884.54 371009 1090398387 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,248.00 371010 1090398388 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 18, 280.86 393346 5/7/2015 136262 WM MERCURY WASTE INC. 2,473.20 BRAEMAR ICE ARENA WASTE 370896 W17588 5511.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 2,473.20 393347 5/7/2015 136251 WRIGHT, NANCY 25.00 AARP DRIVING CLASS REFUND 370897 042315 1628.4392.09 SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS SENIOR CITIZENS 25.00 393346 517/2015 101726 XCEL ENERGY 51.99 51- 4420190 -3 370614 453739320 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER CITY HALL GENERAL 14.60 51- 0010619811 -5 370613 453981895 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 30.46 51- 0223133 -2 370604 453997157 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 26.20 51- 0160483 -1 370603 453997178 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS 14.59 51- 6541084 -2 370612 454095256 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 93.72 51- 6692497 -0 370611 454097246 1460.6185 LIGHT & POWER CIVILIAN DEFENSE 1,934.16 51- 6824328 -7 370615 454100230 5420.6185 LIGHT & POWER CLUB HOUSE 25.31 51- 0010118404 -0 370609 454136324 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 23.25 51- 9770163 -6 370602 454137666 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 84.41 51- 9770164 -7 370610 454138766 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 175.82 51- 0010166207 -2 370608 454141132 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 5.06 51- 0010573385 -0 370606 454151214 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 5.06 51- 0010573502 -3 370605 454151281 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 5.43 51- 0010573384 -9 370607 454156149 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 15.29 51- 01934794 370644 454163562 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT 1,054.52 51- 51076814 370746 454236973 5111.6185 LIGHT & POWER ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT 1,415.06 51- 5547446 -1 370654 454245823 1628.6185 LIGHT & POWER SENIOR CITIZENS 106.71 51- 6050184 -2 370767 454252983 4086.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AQUATIC WEEDS 7,837.16 51- 6644819 -9 370653 454263100 5720.6185 LIGHT & POWER EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 35.15 51- 8976004 -9 370651 454288770 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 183.10 51- 8987646 -8 370652 454289481 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 905,234.36 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Checks 862, 006.64 A/P ACH Payment 43,227.72 Total Payments 905,234.36 r • 0 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/5/2015 11:25:47 Council Check Register by GL Page- 27 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/712015 -- 517/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier /Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393348 5/712015 101726 XCEL ENERGY Continued... 481.90 51- 9011854 -4 370646 454290794 5913.6185 LIGHT &POWER DISTRIBUTION 206.50 51- 9608462 -5 370645 454301562 5921.6185 LIGHT & POWER SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 7,514.30 51- 9603061 -0 370656 454302593 1552,6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1,393.69 51- 0010060454 -7 370655 454304023 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 39.99 51- 0010103585 -7 370647 454310697 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 26.95 51- 0010504853 -2 370648 454316645 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 16.29 51- 0010619788 -5 370649 454321092 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 16.18 51- 0010619810 -4 370650 454321864 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 30,378.87 51- 4621797 -2 370840 454403977 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 9,282.88 51- 6955679 -8 370898 454619450 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER CITY HALL GENERAL 62,494.60 393349 5/7/2015 136233 YONCE, LAURA 250.00 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 370643 4110 SUNNYSIDE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET RD 250.00 393350 5/7/2015 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 342.30 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES 370899 54030770 5410.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GOLF ADMINISTRATION 342.30 905,234.36 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Checks 862, 006.64 A/P ACH Payment 43,227.72 Total Payments 905,234.36 R55CKS2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 5/7/2015 - 5/7/2015 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 148,278.63 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 777.29 02600 ARTS AND CULTURE FUND 900.00 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 6,088.25 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 4,626.30 04500 CANDO FUND 83.50 05100 ART CENTER FUND 4,193.23 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 5,764.79 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 16,898.80 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 7,517.42 05550 SPORTS DOME FUND 14,048.08 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 8,397.15 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 3,019.95 05800 LIQUOR FUND 270,974.69 05900 UTILITY FUND 410,629.54 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 1,561.29 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 1,475.45 Report Totals 905,234.36 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and procedures date -, / 5/5/2015 11:25:53 Page - 1 0 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 1 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL VERNON SELLING LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON SELLING PSTF ADMINISTRATION PARKADMIN. GENERAL FIELD MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET 0 9 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/1412015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1327 5/14/2015 101304 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY 185.74 FLASH TUBES, STROBES 00005186 371236 0143296 -IN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 185.74 1328 5/14/2015 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 401.44 COFFEE 371026 1175433 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 401.44 1329 5/14/2015 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 489.30 371372 47966400 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 9.29 371209 91834700 5840.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 498.59 1330 5/14/2015 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 99.75 BROOMS, PAPER TRIMMER 00042815 371306 WO- 112873 -1 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 193.63 OFFICE SUPPLIES 371519 WO- 113370 -1 7410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.35 OFFICE SUPPLIES 371028 WO- 114121 -1 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 350.73 1331 5/14/2015 101375 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS INC. 730.80 PADLOCKS 00001773 371242 S90914 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 93.88 PADLOCKS, KEYLUB SPRAY 00001914 371029 S90918 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 824.68 1332 6114/2015 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 15.27 OFFICE SUPPLIES 371307 107787 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 15.27 1333 5114/2015 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 485.97 FUEL TANK BAND 371422 942608X1 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 23.01 INSULATOR 371423 942608X3 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 67.92 VALVE CHECK 00005260 371031 954716 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 25.94 FUEL CONDITIONER 00005283 371032 955892 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 439.49 WATER KIT, TENSIONER 00005269 371425 955996 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 21.01- CREDIT 371426 CM942608A 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 21.01- CREDIT 371427 CM942608X3 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 283.86- CREDIT 371424 CM954683 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 716.45 1334 5/14/2015 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 139.00 SOIL OBSERVATIONS 371033 B026576 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 0 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 1 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL VERNON SELLING LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON SELLING PSTF ADMINISTRATION PARKADMIN. GENERAL FIELD MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 2 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS INSPECTIONS PARKING RAMP CENT SVC PW BUILDING LITTER REMOVAL CITY HALL GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING LITTER REMOVAL 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL • CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS101 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1334 5114/2015 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC Continued... 139.00 1335 5114/2015 116114 CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA INC. 143.88 OCE MAINTENANCE 371309 988414665 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 143.88 1336 5114/2015 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 442.00 CLEANERS, DISINFECTANT 371434 518342 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 442.00 1337 5114/2015 100687 CITY OF RICHFIELD 1,092.00 INSPECTION FEES 371036 5115 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,092.00 1338 5/1412015 100513 COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES INC. 258.00 RAMP STAIRWELL CLEANING 371312 7070213336 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,180.00 CLEANING AT PUBLIC WORKS 371313 7070213499 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,438.00 1339 5114/2015 104020 DALCO 1,091.00 RECYCLING CONTAINERS 00001763 371248 2878335 1645.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 61.12 DISH WASH SOAP 00001454 371314 2881171 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 356.48 GLASS CLEANER, TISSUE, WIPES 00001454 371314 2881171 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 199.00 RECYCLING CONTAINER 00001763 371438 2882035 1645.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,707.60 1340 5/14/2015 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 49.20 371182 800605 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 3,453.05 371376 801594 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 70.70 371377 801595 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 3,914.45 371183 801596 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 72.60 371184 801597 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 7,560.00 1341 5114/2015 131551 DELANEY CONSULTING LLC 833.32 EMPLOYEE TRAINING CONSULTING 371037 1362 5860.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 833.34 EMPLOYEE TRAINING CONSULTING 371037 1362 5820.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 833.34 EMPLOYEE TRAINING CONSULTING 371037 1362 5840.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,500.00 i # 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 2 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS INSPECTIONS PARKING RAMP CENT SVC PW BUILDING LITTER REMOVAL CITY HALL GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING LITTER REMOVAL 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL • 0 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 3 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ENVIRONMENT LIQUOR YORK GENERAL Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Countryside H Reconstruction Countryside H Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Countryside H Reconstruction GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE FIELD MAINTENANCE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PW GEOTHERMAL REPAIRS • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/1412015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1342 5/14/2015 100018 EXPERT T BILLING Continued... 6,360.00 APR 2015 BILLINGS 371254 2057 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,360.00 1343 511412015 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC. 425.00 ROWAY 371448 2465930 1263.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 425.00 1344 5/1412015 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE 123.63 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371266 050515 5840.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 123.63 1345 5/14/2015 102079 HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC 2,695.00 SEWER/WATER UPGRADES OOOD2677 371456 14145 05551.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,995.00 SEWERIWATER UPGRADES 00002677 371456 14145 03487.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,295.00 SEWER/WATER UPGRADES 371457 14151 05552.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,895.00 SEWER/WATER UPGRADES 371457 14151 03488.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 2,695.00 SEWERANATER UPGRADES 00002672 371458 14152 05551.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,695.00 SEWERANATER UPGRADES 00002672 371458 14152 03487.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 1,995.00 SEWER/WATER UPGRADES 00002663 371461 14154 05551.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,595.00 SEWER/WATER UPGRADES 00002663 371461 14154 03487.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 2,195.00 SEWERANATER UPGRADES 00002679 371460 14155 05551.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,895.00 SEWERM/ATER UPGRADES 00002679 371460 14155 03487.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,495.00 WATERLINE UPGRADE 00002691 371459 14156 05552.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 35,445.00 1346 5/1412015 100805 HIRSHFIELD'S 42.04 PAINT 00001624 371060 03138412 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 40.26 PAINT, ROLLERS 00001690 371061 03139095 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 82.30 1347 5114/2015 102484 HIRSHFIELD'S PAINT MANUFACTURING 940.50 FIELD PAINT 00001927 371271 106478 1642.6544 LINE MARKING POWDER 940.50 1348 5114/2015 131734 HORWITZ INC. 1,687.98 POOL BOILER MAINTENANCE 371463 W34452 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1,687.98 1349 5114/2015 131734 HORWITZ INC. 4,147.22 MACHINERY REPAIRS 371464 W34313 450004.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 0 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 3 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ENVIRONMENT LIQUOR YORK GENERAL Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Countryside H Reconstruction Countryside H Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction Countryside H Reconstruction GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE FIELD MAINTENANCE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PW GEOTHERMAL REPAIRS R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/1412015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1349 5/14/2015 131734 HORWITZ INC Continued... 40 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 4 Business Unit 1130.6124 4,147.22 COMMUNICATIONS 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 1350 5/1412015 GENERAL SUPPLIES 129635 JESSE JAMES CREATIVE INC. 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 1,600.00 CITY EXTRA MIGRATION BUILDING MAINTENANCE 371066 JJ5061A GENERAL TURF CARE 650.00 PRODUCTION /PROGRAMMING 371067 JJ5630 2,250.00 1351 511412015 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 98.00 TOILET RENTAL 371068 87421 98.00 1352 5114/2015 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 1,679.11 371193 194869 1,579.11 1353 5/14/2015 100869 MARTIN - MCALLISTER 1,800.00 PUBLIC SAFETY ASSESSMENTS 371280 9728 1,800.00 1354 5/14/2015 101483 MENARDS 26.12 BUILDING SUPPLIES 00008039 371470 82776 71.96 HOSE NOZZLES, HOSE 00001932 371074 84732 102.26 PLUMBING PARTS 00001938 371073 84743 37.89 HARDWARE 00001934 371075 84745 507.95 LUMBER, SUPPLIES - GAZEBO 00001941 371472 84966 87.81 RAKE, POLY, TROWELS 00001957 371471 85184 833.99 1355 511412015 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 660.96 FOOD CUPS, PLATES, NAPKINS 371339 36404 660.96 1356 511412015 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 2,146.78 HOOD, TIRES 00006318 371345 1002912 -00 2,170.39 HEADASSEMBLIES 00006324 371347 1006082 -00 1,947.93- HOOD RETRUN 371346 1006180 -00 562.70- CREDIT 371348 1007034 -00 1,806.54 1357 5/14/2015 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 40 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 4 Business Unit 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 1627.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 1643.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL TURF CARE 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1646.6577 LUMBER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1643.6556 TOOLS GENERAL TURF CARE 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS • COST OF GOODS SOLD 115669 ON CALL SERVICES CLEANING SUPPLIES • CLEANING SUPPLIES R55CKR2 LOGIS101 FOAM, TIES, LOG ROLLERS 371476 2552 CITY OF EDINA 2,299.00 1360 5/1412015 Council Check Register by GL 129485 PAPCO INC. Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 371477 92452 9.05 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1357 5114/2015 COMPOST FOR GARDENS 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 5879 Continued... 184,326.03 54TH ST /ARDEN PARK 371369 050515 01412.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 2,028.40 54TH ST /ARDEN PARK 371369 050515 03487.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 7665 11,956.13 54TH ST /ARDEN PARK 371369 050515 05551.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 1,710.00 54TH ST /ARDEN PARK 371369 050515 04407.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 35.32 200,020.56 371085 7800 407.93 1358 5/14/2016 371084 130141 DENO DISTRIBUTION LLC 343.26 LINERS, SOAP, TISSUE 371194 3444 1359 6/1412016 COST OF GOODS SOLD 115669 ON CALL SERVICES CLEANING SUPPLIES 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 2,299.00 FOAM, TIES, LOG ROLLERS 371476 2552 5511.6511 2,299.00 1360 5/1412015 129485 PAPCO INC. 9.05 WAND NUT 371477 92452 9.05 1361 5/14/2015 119486 PARAGON BLACK DIRT 840.00 COMPOST FOR GARDENS 371478 5879 840.00 1362 6114/2015 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 1,904.12 CUTLERY, PLATES, CUPS 371083 7665 508.34 GLOVES, TISSUE, TOWELS 00002187 371483 7667 775.07 TOWELS, LINERS, GLOVES 00002193 371082 7732 35.32 NAPKIN DISPENSERS 371085 7800 407.93 DISINFECTANT, LINERS 00002202 371084 7801 343.26 LINERS, SOAP, TISSUE 371484 7825 3,974.04 1363 6114/2015 100974 RAYMOND E. HAEG PLUMBING 212.40 MENS ROOM PLUMBING 371349 17368 212.40 1364 6/14/2015 101000 RJM PRINTING INC. 57.50 BUSINESS CARDS 371486 85129 58.50 BUSINESS CARDS 371487 86112 116.00 5822.5513 5720.6530 7412.6406 1643.6103 0 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 5 Business Unit GLEN VIEWADDITION NHOOD RECON Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction 54TH ST RECONSTRUCTION COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PSTF RANGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 5720.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 5730.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1550.6406 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS CITY HALL GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS101 5/14/2015 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION CITY OF EDINA 711.59 CONCESSION PRODUCT Council Check Register by GL 42402698 5520.5510 711.59 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 1370 5/14/2015 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 5/14/2015 - 5114/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1365 5/1412015 101004 SPS COMPANIES 371225 Continued... 5842.5513 143.42 GAS PIPE/ FITTINGS 00001886 371357 53073120.001 47083.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 5862.5513 372.25 TOUCHLESS FAUCET 00002205 371490 53075660.001 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 393351 30.30 IRRIGATION PARTS 000D1923 371089 53077229.001 1642.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 545.97 1,045.68 REMOVE OAK TREE 00001935 371235 6300 GLEASON RD 1366 5/14/2015 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 2,936.40 BODY REPAIR 371492 673256 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 2,936.40 56.59 HEATERS VENT PIPE 00001889 371300 1367 511412015 103277 TITAN MACHINERY 56.59 377.00 GLASS 00005353 371096 5874106 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 377.00 439.95 GLOVES 371021 1368 5/14/2015 119454 VINOCOPIA 429.75 BASKETS, SEAT COVERS 371301 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 6 Business Unit UTLEY PK BATHROOM RENOVATION POOL OPERATION FIELD MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 371403 0123837 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1369 5/14/2015 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 711.59 CONCESSION PRODUCT 371504 42402698 5520.5510 711.59 1370 5/14/2015 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 923.55 371404 392132 -00 5822.5513 501.90 371225 392149 -00 5842.5513 1,459.48 371226 392290 -00 5862.5513 2,884.93 393351 5114/2015 112786 ABBOTT BROTHERS TREE CARE 1,045.68 REMOVE OAK TREE 00001935 371235 6300 GLEASON RD 1644.6103 1,045.68 393362 511412015 100614 ACE SUPPLY CO. INC. 56.59 HEATERS VENT PIPE 00001889 371300 385056 47083.6710 56.59 393363 511412016 129458 ACME TOOLS 439.95 GLOVES 371021 3331232 1301.6406 429.75 BASKETS, SEAT COVERS 371301 3344614 1301.6406 50.40 STARTER ASSEMBLIES 00005191 371237 3348745 1553.6530 149.00 RATCHET KIT 00005325 371238 3364500 1553.6556 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WANE VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT UTLEY PK BATHROOM RENOVATION GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 0 0 is • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation 393353 5114/2015 COST OF GOODS SOLD 129458 ACME TOOLS 639.20 1,069.10 371303 393354 5/14/2015 135922 ACUSHNET COMPANY 639.20 115.72 GOLF BALLS 393357 115.72 GOLF BALLS 105991 AL'S COFFEE COMPANY 231.44 393355 5/14/2015 106.70 131688 ADLER, LAURA is CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Continued... 371516 900530956 5440.5511 371515 900550110 5440.5511 371302 050615 1263.6406 371302 050615 1263.6107 393356 5/14/2015 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 135313 AIR CLIMATE CONTROL INC. CONTRACTED REPAIRS CLUB HOUSE COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 639.20 REFRIGERATION MAINTENANCE 371303 44394 5420.6180 639.20 393357 5/14/2015 105991 AL'S COFFEE COMPANY 106.70 COFFEE 371022 40141 5730.5510 106.70 393358 5/14/2015 100867 ALSTAD, MARIAN 5.20 ART WORK SOLD 371135 050415 5101.4413 5.20 393359 5114/2015 127365 AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY 84.32 AIR CARTRIDGE 00005268 371023 AFS- 251210025 1553.6530 84.32 393360 5/14/2015 100630 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY 261.63 PAPER 371413 10434374 -00 5410.6513 261.63 393361 5/14/2015 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 374.04 CONCESSION PRODUCT 371024 504240612 5730.5510 399.12 FOOD 371414 505010659 5421.5510 393.41 CONCESSION PRODUCT 371415 505050065 5730.5510 1,166.57 393362 5/14/2015 135988 APPRIZE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS 781.00 MAY 2015 ADMIN FEES 371416 10869 1556.6103 0 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 7 Business Unit COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES GENERALSUPPLIES ENVIRONMENT MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENVIRONMENT CONTRACTED REPAIRS CLUB HOUSE COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES REPAIR PARTS OFFICE SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GOLF ADMINISTRATION EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS GRILL EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES R55CKR2 LOGIS101 5/1412015 CITY OF EDINA 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS Council Check Register by GL 366.58 WASTE DISPOSAL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 1- 14635 -5/15 7411.6182 5/14/2015 -- 5114/2015 219.73 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393362 5/14/2015 135988 APPRIZE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS Continued... 781.00 393366 393363 5114/2015 100632 AQUA ENGINEERING 23.20 SPRINKLER HEAD 371025 69615 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GRANDVIEW DIST TRANSPORTATION 23.20 1320.1 9234.6136 393364 511412015 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 8 Business Unit GENERAL MAINTENANCE 1,129.00 371176 3029593 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 224.00 371370 3030787 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 886.00 371371 3030791 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 393365 5/1412015 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 366.58 WASTE DISPOSAL 371517 1- 14635 -5/15 7411.6182 219.73 ROLL OFF DUMPSTERS 371027 1 -33186 5 5720.6182 586.31 393366 5114/2015 136259 AVENUE DESIGN PARTNERS 1,440.00 GRANDVIEW DIST TRANSPORTATION 371239 1320.1 9234.6136 1,440.00 393367 5/1412015 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 70.56 BATTERIES 00003165 371240 018- 371018 1400.6406 226.07 BATTERIES, FLASHLIGHTS 371304 018- 371052 1301.6406 635.88 BATTERIES FOR SCADA BACKUP 00001959 371305 018 - 371120 5921.6530 934.51 393368 5/14/2015 130251 BEARDEN, JAMES 500.00 PEOPLE'S CHOICE WINNER 371232 050515 2610.6103 500.00 393369 5/14/2015 101343 BEHR, JASON 1,186.76 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 371241 050615 1400.6104 1,186.76 393370 5114/2015 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC. 703.90 LAWN CARE 371518 144673 7411.6136 703.90 3933711 5114/2015 100661 BENN, BRADLEY RUBBISH REMOVAL PSTF OCCUPANCY RUBBISH REMOVAL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PROFESSIONALSVC - OTHER GRANDVIEWTIF DISTRICT GENERALSUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT PUBLIC ART CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY 0' • 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 9 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES PW GEOTHERMAL REPAIRS ARENA CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS • 283.00 371210 • 5842.5514 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 YORK SELLING CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL 5/14/2015 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 560.85 COFFEE 371421 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 5520.5510 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393371 611412015 100661 BENN, BRADLEY 393376 5/14/2015 Continued... 134713 BIO LAWN 100.10 ART WORK SOLD 371136 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 115.00 100.10 371418 84306 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 393372 5/14/2015 105833 BERGERSON - CASWELL INC. 1,087.50 GEOTHERMAL LEAK DETECTION 371417 19378 450004.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 1,087.50 393373 5/14/2015 371030 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC. 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 144.00 PIZZA 371419 D2813365 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 288.00 PIZZA 371420 D2813374 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 432.00 1,586.61 393374 5/1412015 81764407 125139 BERNICK'S FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL • 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 9 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES PW GEOTHERMAL REPAIRS ARENA CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 283.00 371210 216676 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 283.00 393376 5/14/2015 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 560.85 COFFEE 371421 T95345 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 560.85 393376 5/14/2015 134713 BIO LAWN 115.00 CUST #156623 FERTILIZATION 371418 84306 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 115.00 393377 5114/2015 125268 BLUE COMPACTOR SERVICES 386.00 MAY 2015 COMPACTOR RENTAL 371030 MAY2015 -2 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 386.00 393378 5/14/2015 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 1,586.61 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003574 371428 81764407 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,586.61 393379 5114/2015 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 633.00 371179 126276 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,739.24 371373 126297 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 238.50 371177 126325 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 76.50 371178 126340 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 340.50 371211 126418 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 390.03 371374 126434 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,417.77 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 5/14/2015 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION 100667 BROCK WHITE COMPANY CITY OF EDINA TRAINING 5/12/2015 13:16:48 FIELD MAINTENANCE SAND GRAVEL & ROCK 240.00 CRAFCO SEMINAR 371308 Council Check Register by GL 1281.6104 Page- 10 240.00 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 393383 5/1412015 100669 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 528.34 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393379 5114/2015 1642.6517 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 1,061.90 Continued... 393380 5/14/2015 393384 131594 BOWMAC EDUCATIONAL SERVICES INC. 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 8,340.00 CRITICAL INCIDENT TRAINING 371520 11 7410.6218 EDUCATION PROGRAMS PSTF ADMINISTRATION 5424.6590 8,340.00 375.08- CREDIT 371432 925982036 5424.6590 393381 5/14/2015 5,940.00 100663 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 393385 5/14/2015 134.18 371521 050715 5210.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 115.96 UNIFORM PURCHASE 29.73 050515 371521 050715 5420.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE 36.03 371521 050715 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 371521 050715 5421.5510 371521 050715 5422.6275 393382 5/14/2015 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION 100667 BROCK WHITE COMPANY CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING SAND GRAVEL & ROCK FIELD MAINTENANCE SAND GRAVEL & ROCK 240.00 CRAFCO SEMINAR 371308 12529991 -00 1281.6104 240.00 393383 5/1412015 100669 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. 528.34 AG LIME 371429 7161 1642.6517 533.56 AG LIME 00001900 371430 7162 1642.6517 1,061.90 393384 5/14/2015 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 6,315.08 RANGE BALLS 371431 925963214 5424.6590 375.08- CREDIT 371432 925982036 5424.6590 5,940.00 393385 5/14/2015 101788 CAMPBELL, RICHARD 115.96 UNIFORM PURCHASE 371247 050515 1400.6203 115.96 393386 5/1412015 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 1,190.05 371180 574375 5822.5514 4,171.30 371181 575223 5842.5514 5,361.35 393387 6114/2016 129923 CAWLEY 24.82 NAME BADGES 371522 V289253 1500.6103 24.82 • • COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COURSE BEAUTIFICATION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING SAND GRAVEL & ROCK FIELD MAINTENANCE SAND GRAVEL & ROCK FIELD MAINTENANCE RANGE BALLS RANGE BALLS UNIFORM ALLOWANCE RANGE RANGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 40 • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA - 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 11 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5114/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393388 5/14/2015 123898 CENTURYLINK Continued... 60.19 612 Z28 -0146 371523 0146 -4/15 1628.6188 TELEPHONE SENIOR CITIZENS 169.74 612 Z28 -0146 371523 0146 -4/15 1622.6188 TELEPHONE SKATING & HOCKEY 171.30 612 Z28 -0146 371523 0146 -4/15 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 313.03 612 Z28 -0146 371523 0146 -4/15 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 296.50 612Z28 -0146 371523 0146 -4/15 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 57.56 612 Z28 -0146 371523 0146 -4/15 5911.6188 TELEPHONE WELL PUMPS 37.69 612 Z28 -0146 371523 0146 -4/15 5932.6186 TELEPHONE GENERAL STORM SEWER 56.00 952 929 -0297 371243 0297 -4/15 4090.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 87.45 952 941 -1019 371246 1019 -4/15 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY 59.14 952 941 -1410 371244 1410 -4/15 1622.6188 TELEPHONE SKATING & HOCKEY 110.67 952 826 -7398 371245 7398 -4/15 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 464.06 952 927 -8861 371034 6861 -4/15 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 1,883.33 393389 511412015 127227 CFA SOFTWARE INC. 2,995.00 CFA PROGRAM FEE 371433 12818 1553.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,995.00 393390 5/1412015 129285 CHINOOK BOOK 400.00 AD FOR COUPON BOOK 371035 IM- 0000052902 5710.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 400.00 393391 5/14/2015 122317 CITY OF EDINA - COMMUNICATIONS 100.00 IT SERVICES 371526 COM -0564 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY 100.00 393392 511412015 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 655.84 00101025 - 0203600013 371525 203600013 -4/15 1653.6189 SEWER & WATER SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE 30.95 00101025- 0203610011 371524 203610011 -4/15 1653.6189 SEWER & WATER SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE 686.79 393393 5/14/2015 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 456.88 371375 0128522309 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 456.88 393394 5114/2015 120433 COMCAST 8.99 8772 10 614 0161120 371435 161120 -4/15 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS -- 28.94 8772 10 614 0220686 371436 220686 -05/15 5710.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 37.93 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 -- 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393395 5/1412015 121066 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. Continued... 6,391.93 BLACK TOP 371311 043015 1301.6518 BLACKTOP 6,391.93 393396 5/14/2015 136273 COOK, DEBBIE 105.00 CLASS CANCELATION REFUND 371527 14858 5401.4602 LESSONS 105.00 393397 5114/2015 122132 CREATIVE PRODUCT SOURCING INC. -DARE 688.34 DARE SUPPLIES 371310 84268 1425.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 688.34 393398 511412015 103833 CROW - HASSAN NURSERY L.L.C. 1,200.00 TREES 00001956 371437 3131 1644.6541 PLANTINGS & TREES 1,200.00 393399 5114/2015 100699 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER 20.48 114 - 09855685 -4 371528 043015 7411.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 20.48 393400 5/1412015 100707 DALE GREEN COMPANY, THE 300.00 DIRT 371315 050115 1301.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 300.00 393401 5/1412015 132642 DAUGHTON, JIM 9.72 ART WORK SOLD 371137 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 9.72 393402 511412015 134058 DEHNE, JIM 500.00 PEOPLE'S CHOICE WINNER 371233 050515 2610.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 500.00 393403 5/14/2015 122135 DENFELD, SCOTT 605.76 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 371171 043015 1130.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 151.23 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371170 050515 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 756.99 393404 611412015 136800 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 4,421.25 WORK CREW SERVICES 371439 255732 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20,175.00 WORK CREW SERVICES 371440 274459 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 24,596.25 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 12 Business Unit GENERAL MAINTENANCE GOLF REVENUES DARE TREES & MAINTENANCE PSTF OCCUPANCY GENERAL MAINTENANCE ART CENTER REVENUES PUBLIC ART COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS ARENAADMINISTRATION ARENAADMINISTRATION ,• • • 0 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 13 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5114/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393404 5114/2015 135800 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Continued... 393405 5114/2015 118805 DISCOUNT STEEL INC. 56.82 STEEL 00005261 371249 01091941 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 56.82 393406 5114/2015 104192 DYNAMIC BRANDS 141.25 PUSH CART 371529 952510 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 141.25 393407 5114/2016 119716 EASTERN PACIFIC APPAREL INC. 1,377.00 APPAREL 371531 536415 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 78.00 APPAREL 371530 536508 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1,455.00 393408 5/1412015 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC. 33.51 PUBLISH NOTICE - PAC TEST 371039 214363 1180.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ELECTION 134.04 PUBLISH SAMPLE BALLOT 371038 214364 1180.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ELECTION 39.10 PUBLISH NOTICE 371042 214365 1185.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS 44.68 PUBLISH NOTICE 371041 214366 1185.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS 44.68 PUBLISH NOTICE 371040 214367 1185.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS 2,450.55 EDITION EDINA -APR 2015 371250 215483 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS 2,746.56 393409 5/1412016 100744 EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 30.00 MEETING - BENNEROTTE 371251 35755 1130.6106 MEETING EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 30.00 393410 5/14/2015 100744 EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 805.00 TASTE OF EDINA TICKETS 371316 EDINALIQUOR 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 840.00 TASTE OF EDINA TICKETS 371316 EDINALIQUOR 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 3,080.00 TASTE OF EDINA TICKETS 371316 EDINALIQUOR 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 4,725.00 393411 5/1412015 122079 EDINA COMMUNITY EDUCATION SERVICES 202.50 FORUM 371441 ACCT #2188 1122.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMM 202.50 393412 5/1412015 103594 EDINALARM INC. 343.07 MONITORING SERVICE 371442 96306 5420.6250 ALARM SERVICE CLUB HOUSE 343.07 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 14 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5114/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393412 5/14/2015 103594 EDINALARM INC. Continued... 393413 5/1412015 129947 EHLERS INVESTMENT PARTNERS 103.77 APR 2015 MANAGEMENT FEE 371252 043015 1001.4706 INCOME ON INVESTMENTS GENERAL FUND REVENUES 103.77 393414 5/14/2015 101956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANCE 972.62 T -90 REPAIRS 371443 80011 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 972.62 393415 6/14/2016 134601 EMMONS & OLIVIER RESOURCES INC. 692.75 STREET SWEEPING MGMT 371444 01169 - 0001 -9 04401.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN PROMENADE H2O FEATURE &PATH 692.75 393416 5/14/2015 136021 EPIC SOLUTIONS 310.50 GLASS BEAD DISPENSER 371043 2802 1335.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PAVEMENT MARKINGS 434.10 PAINT GUN 00001741 371044 2816 1335.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PAVEMENT MARKINGS 744.60 393417 5/14/2015 102179 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO INC. 554.64 BLOCK 00001905 371253 022482 5932.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL STORM SEWER 554.64 393418 5/1412015 100880 EXECUTIVE OFFICE CONCEPTS LTD 391.10 TAPES FOR BACKUPS 00004334 371045 161732 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 391.10 393419 6/14/2015 104195 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. 279.20 371212 268 -857 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 279.20 393420 511412015 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 230.06 BATTERIES 00005278 371048 1- Z04303 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 16.44 COOLANT 371046 69- 176086 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 91.47 BRAKE KIT, ROTOR ASSEMBLY 371047 69- 176514 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 101.32 BRAKE KIT, ROTORS 371256 69- 176976 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 29.52 SPARK PLUGS 371255 69- 176991 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 40.62 FILTERS 371259 69- 177024 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 21.78 SWITCH ASSEMBLY 371257 69- 177071 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 76.82 SPARK PLUGS, FILTERS 371445 69- 177112 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 71.46 FILTERS 371258 69- 177167 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 15 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393420 5/1412015 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY Continued... 98.47 TENSIONERS, V -BELT 371260 69- 177218 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 26.50 FILTER, PAN SET 371446 69- 177228 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 804.46 393421 5/14/2015 102485 FAHRENKRUG, ROGER 646.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 371511 050715 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES 846.00 393422 511412015 122549 FARNER - BOCKEN COMPANY 537.85 CONCESSION PRODUCT 371447 3920199 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 537.85 393423 5/14/2015 130136 FAUS, SUSAN 112.70 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371532 050715 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARKADMIN. GENERAL 112.70 393424 5/14/2015 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 442.44 CS PARTS 00001671 371049 0131583 -1 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 1,888.52 SERVICE REPAIR PARTS 00001866 371317 0134690 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS DISTRIBUTION 2,330.96 393425 5114/2015 132172 FETTIG, DERIK 57.00 SUPER 6 &7 PROGRAM 371533 PROGRAM REFUND 1600.4390.27 SUPER 6 & 7 PROGRAM PARKADMIN. GENERAL 57.00 393426 5/1412015 133257 FILBIN, SUZANNE 9.75 ART WORK SOLD 371138 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 9.75 393427 5114/2015 126444 FISH WINDOW CLEANING 1,250.00 PARKING RAMP WINDOWS 371318 2315 -10010 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP 1,250.00 393428 511412015 102727 FORCE AMERICA 1,828.25 SANDER CONTROL BOARD 00005355 371261 01445625 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,828.25 393429 511412016 136268 FORSCH POLYMER CORP. 1,016.44 PAINT FOR POOL PADS 00002150 371449 41814 5311.6532 PAINT POOL OPERATION 1.018.44 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page - 16 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393429 6114/2016 136268 FORSCH POLYMER CORP. Continued... 393430 6/14/2015 136271 FREELAND, MELISSA 138.00 CANCELATION REFUND 371534 JR LEAGUE 5401.4593 GREEN FEES EXEC COURSE GOLF REVENUES 138.00 393431 5/1412016 100764 G & K SERVICES 102.53 CUST #0039263 371450 1013878752 5421.6201 LAUNDRY GRILL 102.53 393432 6/14/2016 120776 GAGE, NATHALIE 49.34 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371172 050515 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 49.34 393433 611412015 105508 GEMPLER'S INC. 264.20 SAFETY GLASSES 00001902 371050 1020602242 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 264.20 393434 5/14/2015 103185 GERTENS 11.48 TOPSOIL 00001952 371451 346865/1 1644.6541 PLANTINGS & TREES TREES & MAINTENANCE 11.46 393435 511412016 127516 GILGENBACH, JORDAN 221.92 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 371051 REIMBURSE 1130.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS COMMUNICATIONS 221.92 393436 5/14/2016 100780 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL INC. 1,919.15 APR 2015 SERVICE 00001859 371052 135843 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 1,919.15 393437 5/14/2015 111092 GOTZSCHE, OTTO 33.80 ART WORK SOLD 371139 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 33.80 393438 5114/2015 102646 GRAFFITI CONTROL SERVICES 318.00 GRAFFITI REMOVAL 371262 940 1301.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 159.00 GRAFFITI REMOVAL 371053 949 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 477.00 393439 6114/2016 101103 GRAINGER 43.24 HEX KEYS, WASP KILLER 00006364 371319 9719341894 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE • 371185 181137 5822.5513 i 50TH ST SELLING 1,094.75 ! R55CKR2 LOGIS101 181253 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING CITY OF EDINA 371214 5/12/2015 13:16:48 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,721.83 Council Check Register by GL Page- 17 393441 5/1412015 100785 GREUPNER, JOE Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 300.00 WINTER DOME KIDS KAMP 371452 001 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393439 5/14/2015 101103 GRAINGER 393442 5114/2015 100008 GRUBE, MIKE Continued... 3.54 BATTERY 2,007.00 371320 9720140053 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GOLF REVENUES 178.93 CHAIR DOLLY 00006364 371321 9722998474 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE 102967 HALSTEAD, TODD 35.80 DOOR BELL 00006364 371322 9723109485 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE 050715 618.63 HYDRANT PAINT 00001903 371054 9725109574 5913.6532 PAINT DISTRIBUTION 32.34 PENS, CLIPS 00005315 371056 9726286595 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 9.32 SCREW 00005316 371055 9727471709 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 16.50 CORRECTION TAPE 00005315 371264 9728208845 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 17.86 SUCTION CUP LIFTERS 00005317 371265 9728392508 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 36.49 SEALANT, SUCTION CUP LIFTER 00005317 371263 9728547457 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 31.76 CLEAN UP KITS, GLOVES 00001925 371323 9728547465 1280.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 47.64 CLEAN UP KITS, GLOVES 00001925 371323 9728547465 1375.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARKING RAMP 63.52 CLEAN UP KITS, GLOVES 00001925 371323 9728547465 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 63.52 CLEAN UP KITS, GLOVES 00001925 371323 9728547465 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 79.40 CLEAN UP KITS, GLOVES 00001925 371323 9728547465 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 95.28 CLEAN UP KITS, GLOVES 00001925 371323 9728547465 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 238.00 CLEAN UP KITS, GLOVES 00001925 371323 9728547465 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 5.50 BATTERIES 00005280 371453 9730139624 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 63.80 NITRILE GLOVES 371536 9731653789 7411.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 122.13 ANEMOMETER 371535 9733077466 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 1,803.20 393440 5/14/2015 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 404.58 371185 181137 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,094.75 371213 181253 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,222.50 371214 181317 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,721.83 393441 5/1412015 100785 GREUPNER, JOE 300.00 WINTER DOME KIDS KAMP 371452 001 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES 783.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 371512 050715 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES 1,083.00 393442 5114/2015 100008 GRUBE, MIKE 2,007.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 371513 050715 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES 2,007.00 393443 5/14/2015 102967 HALSTEAD, TODD 161.60 UNIFORM PURCHASE 371454 050715 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 161.60 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 18 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393444 511412015 136272 HANNAN, ELIZABETH Continued... 110.00 CANCELATION REFUND 371537 JR DEVELOPMENT 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES 110.00 393445 5/14/2015 130116 HARRIS CONTRACTING COMPANY 3,368.25 TOTAL CONTROL UPGRADE 00001620 371455 80267 450005.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENTRALIZED HVAC CONTROLS 3,368.25 393446 5114/2015 100797 HAWKINS INC. 4,008.96 CHEMICALS 00005285 371267 3721259 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 4,396.15 CHEMICALS 00005285 371268 3721665 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 8,405.11 393447 511412015 100799 HEDBERG SUPPLY 375.91 RIVER ROCK 00001755 371057 407666 1344.6577 LUMBER RETAINING WALL MAINTENANCE 126.10 DRAIN TILE 00001756 371058 407667 1344.6577 LUMBER RETAINING WALL MAINTENANCE 502.01 393448 5/14/2015 106371 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 2,475.08 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 371269 39395 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,475.08 393449 5/14/2015 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 307.80 APR 2015 BOOKINGS 371270 1000060264 1195.6170 COURT CHARGES LEGAL SERVICES 307.80 393450 5/1412015 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 1,336.44 APR 2015 RADO FLEET FEES 371329 1000060404 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,163.76 APR 2015 RADIO FLEET FEES 371328 1000060405 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 165.00 JAN 2015 BUNDLED SERVICE 371324 1000060551 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 165.00 FEB 2015 BUNDLED SERVICE 371325 1000060552 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 165.00 MAR 2015 BUNDLED SERVICE 371326 1000060553 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 165.00 APR 2015 BUNDLED SERVICE 371327 1000060554 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 165.00 BUNDLED SERVICE 371569 1000060555 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING 165.00 BUNDLED SERVICE 371570 1000060556 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING 165.00 BUNDLED SERVICE 371571 1000060557 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING 16500 BUNDLED SERVICE 371572 1000060558 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING 4,820.20 393451 511412015 115377 HENRICKSEN PSG 262.45 FILE CABINET 371330 564102 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES • 10 CITY HALL GENERAL • s 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 19 Business Unit CONTINGENCIES YORK SELLING YORK SELLING EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS POOL OPERATION 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES DWI FORFEITURE DWI FORFEITURE TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT WATER TREATMENT DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT METER REPAIR WATER TREATMENT 0 0 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393451 5/14/2015 115377 HENRICKSEN PSG Continued... 586.50 EVIDENCE ROOM FURNISHINGS 371059 564103 1500.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 848.95 393452 5/14/2015 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 2,305.25 371216 760966 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 30.00 371215 760967 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 2,335.25 393453 5114/2015 100417 HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY 76.93 CHLORINE TEST STRIPS 00002204 371062 150422031 5720.6545 CHEMICALS 19,870.00 OUTDOOR LAP POOL PAINTING 371462 J150330006 -D 5311.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 19, 946.93 393454 5/14/2015 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY 285.00 371186 28556 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 540.00 371217 28777 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 825.00 393455 5/14/2015 128034 INDEPENDENT OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION LLC 868.00 OFFICIATING FEES 371573 550 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 868.00 393456 5/14/2015 103193 INTOXIMETERS INC. 180.00 MOUTHPIECES 371272 496584 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 133.25 REPAIR 371273 496839 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 313.25 393457 5/14/2015 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE 13.25 371465 4 /15 -ENG 1262.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 181.57 371065 4/15 -EQUIP 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 31.73 371331 4 /15- FACILITIES 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 529.88 371063 4/15 -PARKS 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 5.83 371064 4 /15- UTILITIES 5921.6556 TOOLS 7.98 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5915.6556 TOOLS 11.97 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5913.6532 PAINT 14.39 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5913.6556 TOOLS 18.39 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5913.6543 SOD & BLACK DIRT 19.02 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5921.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 30.64 371064 4 /15- UTILITIES 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 47.77 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5915.6530 REPAIR PARTS s 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 19 Business Unit CONTINGENCIES YORK SELLING YORK SELLING EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS POOL OPERATION 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES DWI FORFEITURE DWI FORFEITURE TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT WATER TREATMENT DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT METER REPAIR WATER TREATMENT R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 20 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 -- 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # 393457 5/14/2015 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE 103.33 134.59 212.59 13.87 1,402.35 393458 5/14/2015 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 3,137.25 Doc No Inv No Account No 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5913.6406 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5912.6406 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5915.6406 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5934.6406 371064 4/15- UTILITIES 5932.6406 371187 2349496 5822.5514 371466 2364736 5421.5514 3,529.85 393459 511412015 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 89.73 SWING JOINT 00006323 371333 71392804 102.26 COUPLINGS 00006325 371332 71429706 191.99 393460 5114/2015 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 1,196.69 371189 5149419 2,284.20 371188 5149423 2.32 371191 5149427 2.32 371192 5149429 3,789.43 371190 5149453 896.00 371390 5149903 3,401.05 371385 5155040 2,117.57 371383 5155044 144.26 371387 5155048 3,033.85 371384 5155061 89.66 371389 5155062 2,517.84 371386 5155063 2,056.40 371380 5155064 62.82 371379 5155065 1,370.35 371388 5155066 21.99 371381 5155067 381.04 371378 5155068 25.16 371382 5155069 23,392.95 393461 511412015 123696 JOHNSTON, TORI 7.60 ART WORK SOLD 371140 050415 • Subledger Account Description Continued... GENERALSUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES Business Unit DISTRIBUTION WELL HOUSES WATER TREATMENT STORM LIFT STATION MAINT GENERAL STORM SEWER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES is 0 9 0 0 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 21 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393461 511412015 123696 JOHNSTON, TORI Continued... 7.80 393462 6/1412015 102113 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 1,683.40 UTLEY PARK HEATERS 00001898 371335 103619 47083.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT UTLEY PK BATHROOM RENOVATION 51.92 THERMOSTAT COVERS 00001896 371334 103634 5420.6530 REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE 1,735.32 393463 5/14/2015 136260 JOY PECCHIA INTERNATIONAL INC. 1,250.00 LEADERSHIP WORKSHOP 371299 04172015KK 1556.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES 1,250.00 393464 511412015 136270 KALM HOMES LLC 2,500.00 ED137859 ESCROW REFUND 371538 5805 TRACYAVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 393465 5/14/2015 130789 KATZ, DAVID 183.00 HOMETOWN HEROES 371069 199 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 77.00 STORY FOR SALE CATALOG 371069 199 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 260.00 393466 511412015 102824 KAY PARK -REC CORP. 4,685.00 PADDLEBOATS 00002367 371274 00170084 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 4,685.00 393467 5/14/2015 111018 KEEPRS INC. 491.12 UNIFORMS 00003591 371467 275187 -01 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 509.10 00003510 371468 275361 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,000.22 393468 5/14/2015 113212 KEN DELL DOORS & HARDWARE INC. 222.00 KEYS CUT, CORES 371337 SI0000000019122 1500.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTINGENCIES 337.77 CORES, KEYS 00006418 371336 S1019150 5420.6530 REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE 559.77 393469 5/1412015 134811 KLAPPERICK, SEAN 19.00 CLASS A LICENSE 371275 050615 1280.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 19.00 393470 5/14/2015 116192 KNUDSON, DEBBIE 675.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 371514 050715 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393470 5/1412015 115192 KNUDSON, DEBBIE Continued... 675.00 393471 5/14/2015 130215 KUEHL, RHONDA 13.00 ART WORK SOLD 371141 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13.00 393472 5114/2015 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 480.05 NUTS, WASHERS, PINS 00005249 371276 9303203548 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 427.88 DRILL BITS, HOSE CLAMPS 00005275 371070 9303236328 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2.18 HOSE 00005192 371071 9303239571 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 910.11 393473 5114/2015 134957 LEACH LAW OFFICE 19,792.60 APRIL 2015 FEES 371338 APR 2015 1195.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 19,792.60 393474 5/1412015 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 20.00 WORKSHOP 371539 215297 1556.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 20.00 393475 5/14/2015 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 250.50 CLAIM 371540 C0036546 1550.6200 INSURANCE 250.50 393476 5/14/2015 134060 LEGEROS, NICHOLAS 500.00 PEOPLE'S CHOICE WINNER 371234 050515 2610.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 500.00 393477 5114/2015 136275 LEMING, ELIZABETH & ANDY 191.58 IRRIGATION REPAIRS 371574 050815 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 191.58 393478 5114/2015 136027 LINA 4,134.42 MAY 2015 PREMIUMS 371541 0416005118 -5/15 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 4,134.42 393479 6/14/2015 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. 389.43 WHEEL HUB ASSEMBLY 00005266 371277 2153018 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 396.03 NOSE PIECES 00005320 371278 2153040 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 785.46 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 22 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN LEGAL SERVICES EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PUBLIC ART DISTRIBUTION PAYROLL CLEARING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 0 • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 23 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393479 5/1412015 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. Continued... 393480 511412015 127698 MADD -MN 200.00 MADD CRASH CAR 371279 4292015KD 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 200.00 393481 511412015 122878 MARTTI, DOROTHEA 280.00 HOSTING FEES 371575 206 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 280.00 393482 5114/2015 122554 MATHESON TRI -GAS INC. 191.16 OXYGEN 00003649 371469 11253567 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 191.16 393483 5/14/2015 134646 MCGRATH, PATTY 144.61 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371542 050815 5710.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 144.61 393484 5114/2015 113941 MEDICA 486.79 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 371072 ZACHARY MCGEE 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 486.79 393485 5/14/2015 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 447.57 VEHICLE REPAIRS 371281 261708 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 447.57 393486 5/14/2015 122473 MILLER, CHICHI 11.02 ART WORK SOLD 371142 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 11.02 393487 5114/2015 102873 MILLER, SUSAN 358.81 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371543 050815 5510.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ARENAADMINISTRATION 358.81 393488 5/14/2015 130635 MILLNER, CHAD 136.97 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 371173 050415 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL 390.00 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 371173 050415 1260.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL 294.40 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371174 050615 1260.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL 821.37 393489 5/14/2015 101542 MILTONA TURF PRODUCTS R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 24 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393489 5/1412015 101542 MILTONA TURF PRODUCTS Continued... 187.16 TEE MARKERS 371340 001568 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 187.16 393490 511412015 100913 MINNEAPOLIS 8, SUBURBAN SEWER & WATER 2,000.00 SEWER/WATER UPGRADES 00002655 371473 34934 05551.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN Arden Park D Reconstruction 4,250.00 SEWERNVATER UPGRADES 00002655 371473 34934 03487.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN Arden Park D Reconstruction 2,422.50 INSTALL ROD EXT / RISER 00001869 371341 34936 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 8,672.50 393491 6/14/2015 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 11,904.90 APR 2015 WATER 371175 431 - 0005 -4/15 5913.6601 WATER PURCHASED DISTRIBUTION 11, 904.90 393492 5114/2015 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 34.76 CO2, METHAIR 371544 171126487 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 34.76 393493 5/14/2015 127062 MINNEHAHA BLDG. MAINT. INC. 21.38 WINDOW CLEANING 371076 928037882 5841.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY 16.09 WINDOW CLEANING 371342 928037883 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY 5.36 WINDOW CLEANING 371343 928038290 5821.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 42.83 393494 5/14/2016 101638 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 23.00 CLASS C FEE 371282 JOSH WAGNER 5913.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS DISTRIBUTION 23.00 393495 5/1412015 101638 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 32.00 CLASS D EXAM FEE 371576 CHET BOOM 5913.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS DISTRIBUTION 32.00 393496 5/14/2015 100903 MINNESOTA ELEVATOR INC 2,258.60 YEARLY MAINTENANCE 371474 621660 5710.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 2,258.60 393497 5/1412015 101637 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 45.00 SC CERTIFICATION FEE 371078 N. KADERLIK 5923.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS COLLECTION SYSTEMS 45.00 393498 5/14/2015 101537 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY • • • • • • CITY OF EDINA 5/1212015 13:16:48 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 Council Check Register by GL Page- 25 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393498 5/14/2015 101537 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Continued... 45.00 SC CERTIFICATION FEE 371283 JOSH WAGNER 5923.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS COLLECTION SYSTEMS 45.00 393499 5114/2015 101459 MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC 70.00 UMPIRE REGISTRATION 371577 8517 1621.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES 70.00 393600 5/1412015 112908 MINNESOTA ROADWAYS CO. 1,048.00 ASPHALT EMULSION 371284 71985 1301.6519 ROAD OIL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 1,048.00 393501 5114/2015 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 25.00 POSTERS 371285 17513 5110.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 39.00 MAILING LABELS 371344 17514 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 71.10 POSTCARDS 371077 17515 47073.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT VETERANS MEMORIAL 251.00 ANNUAL EVENTS BROCHURE 371545 17607 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS 386.10 393502 5/1412015 129086 MONTGOMERY, MEREDITH 4.88 ART WORK SOLD 371143 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 4.88 393503 5/14/2015 114343 MULLEN, JANET 14.30 ART WORK SOLD 371144 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 14.30 393504 5/1412015 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 211.00 371219 99814 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 279.00 371391 99815 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,190.50 371218 99817 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,680.50 393505 5/14/2015 136274 NIEMAN, JILL 84.00 WATER AEROBICS CLASS 371546 REFUND 1600.4390.15 GEN ADAPTIVE REC PARKADMIN. GENERAL 84.00 393506 5/14/2015 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 199.77 POTTERY TOOL KITS 00009399 371286 47266600 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 199.77 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page - 26 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393507 511412015 105901 OERTEL ARCHITECTS Continued... 5,314.00 EXPANSION PROJECT 371547 2 -SMPSB 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 5,314.00 393508 5114/2015 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 156.40 ZIPLINE ROPE 00002150 371475 559144 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 156.40 393509 5/14/2015 123786 OLSON, VICKI 32.50 ART WORK SOLD 371145 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 32.50 393510 5114/2015 104950 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC. 105.00 SOILTESTING 371549 1500321 7412.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF RANGE 35.00 SOIL TESTING FOR LEAD 371548 1500342 7412.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF RANGE 140.00 393511 5/14/2015 116603 PARKER, KATHLEEN 33.80 ART WORK SOLD 371146 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 33.80 393512 5/14/2015 102440 PASS, GRACE 61.75 ART WORK SOLD 371147 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 61.75 393513 5/1412015 100347 PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY 2,053.28 371220 8497647 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 500.46 371195 8497650 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,553.74 393514 5/1412015 134874 PENTAGON SOUTH LLC 625,000.00 LCA GRANT- DEED 371550 197683 4421.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PENTAGON REVIVAL 625,000.00 393515 5/14/2015 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 914.09 371479 36626123 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 143.30 371079 46043507 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 441.91 371481 46043547 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 442.46 371480 46043552 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 391.10 371392 48487549 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 2,332.86 is • • • 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 27 Business Unit EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 6.10 • 050515 • POSTAGE R55CKR2 LOGIS101 7.00 CITY OF EDINA 050515 1490.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PUBLIC HEALTH Council Check Register by GL 371080 050515 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 19.50 371080 050515 1400.6107 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 POLICE DEPT. GENERAL Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393515 5/14/2015 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 050515 Continued... 393516 5/14/2015 135849 PETSMART #2412 511412015 120988 PLYMOUTH FRAMERY 63.99 K9 DOG FOOD 00003163 371482 T -9289 4607.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 140.00 K9 TRAINING FRAMING 63.99 875847 393517 5/14/2015 103512 PETTY CASH • 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 27 Business Unit EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 6.10 371080 050515 1400.6235 POSTAGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 7.00 371080 050515 1490.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PUBLIC HEALTH 7.99 371080 050515 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 19.50 371080 050515 1400.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 72.09 371080 050515 1400.6106 MEETING EXPENSE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 420.94 371080 050515 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 393518 511412015 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 3.48 3,956.15 57.16 2,574.42 371396 2783957 371394 2783963 371395 2783964 371397 2783965 371393 2783966 371398 2783967 393519 6/14/2016 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 123725 PITNEY BOWES INC. COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 140.22 POSTAGE METER SUPPLIES 371081 818658 140.22 393520 5/14/2015 100958 PLUNKETTS PEST CONTROL 44.89 PEST CONTROL 371552 4764658 44.89 393521 511412015 120988 PLYMOUTH FRAMERY 140.00 K9 TRAINING FRAMING 371551 875847 140.00 393522 5/14/2015 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 350.00 NEWSLETTER POSTAGE 371553 050815 350.00 393623 5/14/2015 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY 5862.5512 5862.5513 5862.5515 5862.5512 5862.5513 5862.5515 5710.6235 7411.6103 1400.6406 1628.6235 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING POSTAGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES POSTAGE EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PSTF OCCUPANCY POLICE DEPT. GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS • • 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 28 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS UTILITY REVENUES RECYCLING INSPECTIONS ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE PARKING RAMP SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD is CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS101 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393523 5/14/2015 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY Continued... 476.00 NITRILE GLOVES 371287 55921 1400.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 476.00 393524 5/14/2015 136024 R.M. DREYLING CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. 150.00 PLYWOOD WALKWAYS 371485 APR -MAY 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 150.00 393525 5/14/2015 120221 RACHEL CONTRACTING 1,390.00 HYDRANT DEPOSIT REFUND 371288 SOUTHDALE MALL 5901.4626 SALE OF WATER 1,390.00 393526 5/14/2015 133627 REPUBLIC SERVICES #894 36,187.38 APR 2015 SERVICE 371554 3803127 5952.6183 RECYCLING CHARGES 36,187.38 393527 5/14/2015 136265 RIDLER HEATING & COOLING INC. 49.25 ED139405 PERMIT REFUND 371350 5512 BLAKE RD 1495.4112 PLUMBING PERMITS 49.25 393528 5/14/2015 136255 RILEY, COLLEEN 96.20 371134 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 350.00 SPRING WORKSHOP 371134 050415 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 446.20 393529 5/14/2015 134173 SAFE -FAST INC. 21.00 SAFETY GLASSES 00005154 371289 INV152455 5913.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 21.00 393530 5114/2015 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 117.18 RECYCLE PARTS WASHER 371290 R002172981 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 117.18 393531 5/14/2015 104151 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP. 839.61 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 371354 8103998531 1653.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 786.30 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 371351 8103999213 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,625.91 393532 5/14/2015 124792 SCHUELLER, JASON 19.00 CLASS DRIVERS LICENSE 371086 050415 1280.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 19.00 • • 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page- 28 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS UTILITY REVENUES RECYCLING INSPECTIONS ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE PARKING RAMP SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD is • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 29 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393532 5/14/2015 124792 SCHUELLER, JASON Continued... 393533 5/14/2015 127490 SCULLY, PATRICIA 29.25 ARTWORK SOLD 371149 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 29.25 393534 5/14/2015 100995 SEH 709.40 BRAEMAR WETLANDS 371555 296624 5400.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS GOLF BALANCE SHEET 709.40 393536 5/1412015 101106 SERVICEMASTER 1,650.00 RAMP TRASH ROOM CLEANING 371353 51079 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP 1,650.00 RAMP TRASH ROOM CLEANING 371352 51080 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP 3,300.00 393536 5/1412015 133883 SERVPRO OF EAGAN /APPLE VALLEY 305.50 CARPET CLEANING -ARNESON 371355 4217219 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 680.00 PW CARPET CLEANING 371356 4217222 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 985.50 393537 511412015 101380 SHAUGHNESSY, SANDRA 46.80 ART WORK SOLD 371150 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 46.80 393638 6/1412015 103237 SHIRLEY, TOM 134.90 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 371291 050415 5760.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 134.90 393539 5/14/2015 120997 SHIRTYSOMETHING 307.45 PARADE SHIRTS 00003812 359733 24915 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 307.45 393540 5/14/2015 120784 SIGN PRO 1,360.00 ATHLETIC SIGNAGE 00009009 371292 9009 1642.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIELD MAINTENANCE 24.00 SPRING SALE SIGNS 371087 9013 5822.6575 PRINTING 50TH ST SELLING 48.00 SPRING SALE SIGNS 371087 9013 5842.6575 PRINTING YORK SELLING 48.00 SPRING SALE SIGNS 371087 9013 5862.6575 PRINTING VERNON SELLING 126.64 50TH ANNIVERSARY SIGNS 371488 9030 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 1,606.64 393541 5114/2015 120292 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page - 30 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393541 5114/2015 120292 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS Continued... 125.78 APPAREL 371557 14523714 7410.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 757.18 APPAREL 371556 14523760 7410.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 882.96 393542 5/14/2015 105654 SIMPLEX GRINNELL LP 1,155.38 SPRINKLER ALARM/TEST 371558 77775847 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF OCCUPANCY 1,155.38 393543 511412015 131885 SISINNI FOOD SERVICES INC. 73.08 HOT DOG BUNS 371489 264228 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 73.08 393544 5/14/2015 122800 SOUTH METRO CARPET & UPHOLSTERY 90.84 SPOT CLEAN CARPET 371088 1232C 5861.6162 SERVICES CUSTODIANS VERNON OCCUPANCY 9D.84 393545 5114/2015 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS .75 371199 1274448 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,212.65 371198 1279202 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING .75 371197 1279207 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 363.75 371196 1280546 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2.63 371223 1281032 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,874.14 371400 1281699 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 221.99 371399 1281700 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2.25 371224 1281701 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 4,216.32 371222 1281702 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 3,738.50 371221 1281703 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 954.07 371200 1281705 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,400.79 371201 1281706 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 17,988.59 393546 5/14/2015 110977 SOW, ADAMA 63.70 ART WORK SOLD 371151 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 63.70 393547 5/14/2015 102251 ST. ANDREWS PRODUCTS CO 710.49 PENCILS, BALLMARKERS 371491 751267 5410.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 710.49 393548 5114/2015 101007 STAR TRIBUNE • • 0 • i R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 31 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 -- 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393548 5/1412016 101007 STAR TRIBUNE Continued... 3,479.32 EDINALIQUOR ADS 371090 APR 2015 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 3,479.34 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 371090 APR 2015 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 3,479.34 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 371090 APR 2015 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 10,438.00 393549 5/14/2015 101007 STAR TRIBUNE 183.30 SUBSCRIPTION 371559 493121 -5/15 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 183.30 393650 5/14/2015 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 214.15 371401 5282 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 491.25 371402 5283 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 705.40 393551 6/14/2015 129409 STEEN, BARB 22.10 ART WORK SOLD 371152 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 22.10 393552 6/14/2015 136261 STOLTMAN, BARTT 6.10 OVERPAYMENT REFUND ON FINAL 371293 6422 VERNON AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 6.10 393563 6/14/2015 123084 STROM, DOUG 100.00 MACHINED A 303SS SHAFT 00005284 371091 050415 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 100.00 393564 6/14/2015 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. 309.98 TIRES 371578 10131470 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 256.78 TIRES 00005358 371493 10132421 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 566.76 393655 5114/2015 135803 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 6,642.28 MAY 2015 PREMIUMS 371560 237716 -5/15 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 PAYROLL CLEARING 275.60 MAY 2015 COBRA 371561 237716 -5 /COBRA 1556.6043 COBRA INSURANCE EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES 6,917.88 393556 5/1412015 117869 SUNICE USA INC. 594.40 JACKETS 371494 1177312 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 594.40 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 511412015 1185.6103 120700 TIGER OAK MEDIA CITY OF EDINA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5/12/2015 13:16:48 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 330.00 EDINALIQUORADS 371092 2015 - 134812 Council Check Register by GL Page - 32 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 371092 2015- 134812 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary EDINA LIQUOR ADS 371092 2015- 134812 990.00 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 393562 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393557 5/14/2015 M21274 121492 SUPERIOR TURF SERVICES INC. 199.00 Continued... 371095 M21275 3,627.55 FERTILIZER 371358 10915 5422.6540 FERTILIZER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 133.00 3,627.55 371093 M21277 730.00 393558 5/1412015 104932 TAYLOR MADE 5/14/2015 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 161.00 GOLF CLUB 371562 30723643 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 70.85 161.00 371497 40026601 341.58 393559 5/14/2015 135814 TEEL RABE, ANN 5/14/2015 131040 TRANS UNION RISK AND ALTERNATIVE 4.23 ART WORK SOLD 371148 050415 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 113.25 4.23 393565 5/14/2015 116535 TRAVELERS 393560 5/1412015 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 1,382.00 DEDUCTIBLE 371564 000481659 • 242.45 371495 891214 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 98.25 371496 892582 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 393561 511412015 1185.6103 120700 TIGER OAK MEDIA 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 330.00 EDINALIQUORADS 371092 2015 - 134812 330.00 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 371092 2015- 134812 330.00 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 371092 2015- 134812 990.00 393562 611412015 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL INC. 232.00 PARK BOARD MEETING 371094 M21274 199.00 4/21/15 COUNCIL MEETING 371095 M21275 166.00 ART /CULTURE COMM MEETING 371294 M21276 133.00 VETERANS MEM MEETING 371093 M21277 730.00 393563 5/14/2015 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 270.73 WELDING GAS 00005258 371097 10077390 70.85 WELDING GAS 371497 40026601 341.58 393564 5/14/2015 131040 TRANS UNION RISK AND ALTERNATIVE 113.25 APR 2015 USAGE 371498 269634 -5/15 113.25 393565 5/14/2015 116535 TRAVELERS 1,382.00 DEDUCTIBLE 371564 000481659 • 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1185.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES 1400.6105 1550.6200 • DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING PARKADMIN. GENERAL LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION PARKADMIN. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL is 0 • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page - 33 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393565 5114/2015 116535 TRAVELERS Continued... 87.50 DEDUCTIBLE 371563 000481991 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,469.50 393566 5/14/2015 102150 TWIN CITY SEED CO. 326.20 FERTILIZER, SEED 371359 34655 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 326.20 393567 511412015 131574 TYMCHUCK, CHRIS 76.00 ART CLASS REFUND 371098 16789 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 76.00 393568 5114/2015 103048 U.S. BANK 450.00 20098 PAYING AGENT FEE 371099 3959540 5310.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POOL ADMINISTRATION 450.00 393569 5/14/2015 103048 U.S. BANK 450.00 2009A PAYING AGENT FEE 371100 3959538 3101.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL DEBT SERVICE REVENUES 450.00 393570 5114/2015 103048 U.S. BANK 939.75 HSAACCT MAINT FEES 371565 9276335 1556.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES 939.75 393571 5/14/2015 100668 URS CORPORATION 5,205.15 PROMENADE - PHASE 4 371566 6255788 9232.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 5,205.15 393572 5/1412015 133209 USPCA REGION 18 20.00 DUAL MEMBERSHIP 371499 SEAN YOUNG 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 20.00 393573 5/14/2015 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 52.71 TOWELS 371501 347767 -00 5420.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES CLUBHOUSE 403.14 TOWELS, LINERS, TISSUE 371500 347784 -00 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL 455.85 393574 5114/2015 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 315.28 CART LEASE 371503 418150003 5423.6216 LEASE LINES GOLF CARS 350.00 CART LEASE 371502 418150004 5423.6216 LEASE LINES GOLF CARS 665.28 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 393574 5/14/2015 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. Continued... 393575 5114/2015 101064 VESSCOINC. 3,287.16 CHLORINE PUMP PARTS 371101 63213 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 3,287.16 393576 5/14/2015 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 1,631.58 WIRE FOR UNDERGROUND 00001606 371360 9239140 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS 56.52 TAMPER KITS 00001830 371361 9252232 1551.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 62.16 OUTLETS 00001836 371362 9254960 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 149.34 MOTION SENSOR FOR LIGHTS 00001899 371363 9263441 47083.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 1,899.60 393577 6/14/2016 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 69.06 TRACK LIGHTING 00001803 371295 15264202 -00 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 174.04 LEWIS PARK FIELD LIGHTS 00001910 371296 15264828 -00 1642.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 243.10 393578 5114/2015 101932 VOTH, BART 149.95 UNIFORM PURCHASE 371297 043015 5913.6201 LAUNDRY 149.95 393579 5/14/2015 103088 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN 40.26 WASTE DISPOSAL 371365 7136746 5511.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 573.08 WASTE DISPOSAL 371364 7137662 1552.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 613.34 393680 5/14/2015 123616 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICES INC. 617.13 LEAK LOCATES 00001861 371102 5964 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 617.13 393581 511412015 130574 WATSON COMPANY 557.51 CONCESSION PRODUCT 371506 850902 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 557.51 393582 5114/2015 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 67.16- 371408 702109 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 24.00- 371407 702261 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 836.94 371202 7028176 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1,139.17 371405 7029117 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 460.64 371406 7029122 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 34 Business Unit POOL OPERATION STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL CITY HALL GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL UTLEY PK BATHROOM RENOVATION ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT FIELD MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS CENT SVC PW BUILDING DISTRIBUTION ARENA CONCESSIONS VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 0 0 0 0 0 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 -- 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 393582 5/14/2015 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 2,345.59 393583 5/14/2015 130471 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 334.66 FERTILIZER 00006321 371366 60007124 334.66 393584 511412015 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 2,557.90 371203 1080316880 88.47 371231 1080316975 2,859.28 371204 1080319906 73.15 371205 1080319907 4,468.85 371206 1080319908 161.18 371207 1080319909 1,431.19 371410 1080319911 130.89 371409 1080319912 2,932.91 371230 1080319964 147.45 371229 1060319965 133.35 371228 1080319966 8,949.27 371227 1080319967 461.86 371411 1080320034 393585 6/14/2015 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 250.00 371507 1090398390 1,692.00 371412 1090398817 2,512.30 371208 1090399587 5422.6540 5822.5513 5842.5512 5862.5513 5862.5515 5862.5512 5862.5515 5822.5512 5822.5512 5842.5513 5842.5515 5842.5515 5842.5512 5842.5513 5421.5514 5862.5514 5842.5514 4,454.30 393586 511412015 133300 WOODVIEW BUILDERS & REMODELERS LLC 2,500.00 ED125388 ESCROW REFUND 371567 5224 W 56TH ST 1495.4109 2,500.00 393587 5/1412015 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. 14,419.25 VALLEY VIEW ROAD CONSTR 371508 5 -01686 -590 01377.1705.20 14,419.25 Subledger Account Description Continued... FERTILIZER is 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Page - 35 Business Unit MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS CONSULTING DESIGN BA -377 VALLEY VIEW RD 393688 6/14/2016 101726 XCEL ENERGY 2,235.30 51- 4159265 -8 371154 453898313 7411.6185 LIGHT & POWER PSTF OCCUPANCY 31.70 51 -0010619455 -3 371367 454152749 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 18.13 51- 0010777228 -2 371167 454156639 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL R55CKR2 LOGIS101 Check # Date 393588 5/14/2015 Amount Supplier / Explanation 101726 XCEL ENERGY 34.57 51- 8102668 -0 692.12 51- 9251919 -0 761.25 51- 4827232 -6 521.17 51- 5634814 -2 282.38 51- 6046826 -0 171.45 51- 5938955 -6 442.28 51- 6229265 -9 1,566.24 51- 6229265 -9 181.45 51- 9337452 -8 35.76 51- 0194596 -8 1,267.53 51- 6979948 -4 1,401.89 51- 6979948 -4 1,571.03 51- 6979948 -4 404.33 51- 9422326 -6 25.70 51- 4151897 -6 25,760.03 51- 4888627 -1 3,545.74 51- 4888627 -1 1,957.47 51- 4966303 -6 417.50 51- 61371368 -8 32.21 51- 7567037 -0 7,466.82 51- 0837548 -4 3,313.54 51- 6840050 -6 54,137.59 393589 5114/2015 132109 YOUNG, SEAN 216.12 DOG FOOD AND SUPPLIES 50.00 USPCA REGION 12 MEMBERSHIP 266.12 393590 511412015 CITY OF EDINA 136276 ARNOTT, JULIE 5/12/2015 13:16:48 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 165.75 Council 393591 511412015 135002 BALOGH, MARY 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 165.75 PO # Doc No 393592 511412015 Account No 134676 BERTRAND, SHERYL Business Unit 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 165.75 0 454450297 1321.6185 371579 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 371580 051115 1180.6013 371581 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION is CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page - 36 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... 371163 454450297 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 371164 454467727 5765.6185 LIGHT & POWER PROMENADE EXPENSES 371160 454584225 5311.6185 LIGHT & POWER POOL OPERATION 371158 454596483 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT 371161 454603773 5422.6185 LIGHT & POWER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 371157 454604014 4086.6185 LIGHT & POWER AQUATIC WEEDS 371156 454608891 1481.6185 LIGHT & POWER YORK FIRE STATION 371156 454608891 1470.6185 LIGHT & POWER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 371162 454651364 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 371159 454689756 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 371155 454804456 5821.6185 LIGHT & POWER 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 371155 454804456 5861.6185 LIGHT & POWER VERNON OCCUPANCY 371155 454804456 5841.6185 LIGHT & POWER YORK OCCUPANCY 371165 454829695 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 371168 454929458 1646.61 B5 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 371153 454940499 5511.6185 LIGHT &POWER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 371153 454940499 5553.6185 LIGHT & POWER SPORTS DOME BLDG &GROUNDS 371169 454943057 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS 371368 454959729 5430.6185 LIGHT & POWER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 371166 454974949 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 371298 455042894 5915.6185 LIGHT & POWER WATER TREATMENT 371568 455667667 5921.6185 LIGHT & POWER SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 371510 K9 4607.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 371509 REIMBURSE 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 371579 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 371580 051115 1180.6013 371581 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION is R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 37 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/1412015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393592 511412015 134676 BERTRAND, SHERYL Continued... 393593 511412015 116939 BORGEN, HOLLY 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371582 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393594 5/1412015 104580 BRADBURY, KATHERINE 227.81 ELECTION JUDGE 371583 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 227.81 393695 5/14/2015 121117 BRISCOE, DAVID 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371584 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393596 5/14/2015 106485 BURNETT, JAMES H. 141.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371585 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 141.38 393597 5/14/2015 106488 CAMPION, CHRISTINE 216.56 ELECTION JUDGE 371586 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 216.56 393598 5114/2015 123156 CHRISTIANSEN, MARILYN 141.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371587 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 141.38 393599 5114/2015 114404 CIPOLLA, JUDY 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371588 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393600 5/14/2015 135012 CLARK, SUSAN 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371589 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393601 511412015 104527 CRACRAFT, JOHN 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371590 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393602 5/14/2015 104528 CRACRAFT, MARIAN 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371591 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 38 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393602 5114/2015 104528 CRACRAFT, MARIAN Continued... 393603 5/1412015 104529 CREW, COLLEEN 210.94 ELECTION JUDGE 371592 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 210.94 393604 511412015 104531 DILL, PATRICIA 216.56 ELECTION JUDGE 371593 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 216.56 393605 5/14/2015 130723 DONOVAN, WENDY 210.94 ELECTION JUDGE 371594 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 210.94 393606 5/1412015 104534 FINK, PAUL 213.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371595 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 213.75 393607 5114/2015 127086 FOSSUM, JOHN 225.00 ELECTION JUDGE 371596 051115 1160.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 225.00 393608 5/1412015 130726 FULUVAKA, SUZANNE 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371597 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393609 5114/2015 123170 GEURTS, VALERIE 236.25 ELECTION JUDGE 371598 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 236.25 393610 5/14/2015 116951 GOLDSTEIN, DEVORAH 233.44 ELECTION JUDGE 371599 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 233.44 393611 5/14/2015 106566 HAMAN, EUGENE E. 213.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371600 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 213.75 393612 5/14/2015 120269 HANSEN, BRIAN 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371601 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 39 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393612 5/14/2015 120269 HANSEN, BRIAN Continued... 393613 5/14/2015 117134 HANSEN, JUDITH 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371602 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393614 5/14/2015 120244 HASNUDEEN, BUDDY 175.50 ELECTION JUDGE 371603 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 175.50 393615 5/14/2015 123503 HATZUNG, LISA 175.50 ELECTION JUDGE 371604 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 175.50 393616 511412015 117139 HOPPE, JUDY 196.88 ELECTION JUDGE 371605 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 196.88 393617 5/14/2015 105397 HYKES, MYRA 219.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371606 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 219.38 393618 5/14/2015 134683 JOHNSON, GRANT 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371607 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393619 511412015 106608 KACHAN, MARY K. 163.31 ELECTION JUDGE 371608 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 163.31 393620 5/1412015 106538 KAPAUN, ANN 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371609 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393621 511412015 134684 KECK, PAUL 225.00 ELECTION JUDGE 371610 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 225.00 393622 511412015 106539 KEENAN, ANN 219.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371611 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 219.38 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 40 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393622 5/1412015 106539 KEENAN, ANN Continued... 393623 511412015 130763 KEINER, JOAN 163.31 ELECTION JUDGE 371612 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 163.31 393624 5114/2015 106541 KLEFSAAS, MAVIS 170.63 ELECTION JUDGE 371613 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 170.63 393625 5/14/2015 130764 KOUDSI, HANA 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371614 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393626 511412015 134685 LABONNE, JUDY 24.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371615 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 24.38 393627 511412015 123179 LANDBERG, JAMES 170.63 ELECTION JUDGE 371616 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 170.63 393628 5114/2015 106550 LANDBERG, MARY 222.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371617 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 222.19 393629 5114/2015 127437 LAPPIN, GERTRUDE 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371618 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393630 5/14/2015 135070 LEHNHOFF, DONALD 160.88 ELECTION JUDGE 371619 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 160.88 393631 5/14/2015 127089 LOVELAND, CYNTHIA 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371620 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393632 511412015 108574 MAETZOLD, LINDA 173.06 ELECTION JUDGE 371621 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 173.06 • • • • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 41 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5114/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393632 5114/2015 108574 MAETZOLD, LINDA Continued... 393633 5114/2015 130768 MAZZARA, PATTI 191.25 ELECTION JUDGE 371622 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 191.25 393634 511412015 106589 MCGOLDRICK, FRANCIS 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371623 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393635 5114/2016 127087 MILLER, KAREN 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371624 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393636 5114/2015 116961 MILLER, NANCY 216.56 ELECTION JUDGE 371625 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 216.56 393637 5/1412016 106606 MONTEZ, PATRICIA 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371626 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393638 5/1412015 135101 MORROW, COOPER 163.31 ELECTION JUDGE 371627 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 163.31 393639 511412015 120393 NAZARIAN, BARBARA 163.31 ELECTION JUDGE 371628 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 163.31 393640 5/1412015 106619 NIEFELD, SUSAN 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371629 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393641 5/14/2015 135106 NYE, DANIEL 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371630 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393642 5114/2015 104616 OLANDER, PATRICIA 239.06 ELECTION JUDGE 371631 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 239.06 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 42 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393642 5114/2015 104616 OLANDER, PATRICIA Continued... 393643 5/14/2015 120254 O'NEILL, ORDELL 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371632 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393644 5114/2015 123195 PEARCE, WAIN 163.31 ELECTION JUDGE 371633 051151 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 163.31 393645 5/14/2016 134688 PFANNENSTEIN, RONALD 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371634 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393646 5/1412015 119667 RAZIDLO, TERESA 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371635 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393647 5114/2015 129967 RISSER, JULIE 225.00 ELECTION JUDGE 371636 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 225.00 393648 5/14/2015 106275 RODGERS, JUDITH 222.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371637 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 222.19 393649 511412015 127081 RODGERS, WILLIAM 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371638 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393650 5/1412015 130771 ROSE NTHAL- ERICKSON, LUANN 219.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371639 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 219.38 393651 5/1412015 130772 ROTHE, CAROL 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371640 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393652 5/14/2015 134689 SCHULTZ, CAROL 173.06 ELECTION JUDGE 371641 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 173.06 • • • • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 43 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393652 5114/2015 134689 SCHULTZ, CAROL Continued... 393653 5/14/2015 136080 SIMS, FLOY 24.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371642 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 24.38 393654 5114/2015 133175 SMITH, DEL 225.00 ELECTION JUDGE 371643 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 225.00 393665 6114/2016 135082 SMITH, JUDY 170.63 ELECTION JUDGE 371644 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 170.63 393656 5/1412015 106609 SMITH, RUTH L 222.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371645 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 222.19 393657 511412015 135084 SPECKHALS DUANE, LYNN 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371646 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393658 5/1412015 134691 STANTON, MARY 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371647 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393659 5/14/2015 124699 STONE, BROWDER 168.19 ELECTION JUDGE 371648 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 168.19 393660 5/14/2015 123210 SWEET, PHILOTHEA 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371649 051115 1160.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393661 5/14/2015 112754 THORNDYKE, KATY 141.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371650 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 141.38 393662 5/14/2015 116976 TIGGAS, ANDREA 196.88 ELECTION JUDGE 371651 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 196.88 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/12/2015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 44 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5/14/2015 — 5/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393662 5/14/2015 116976 TIGGAS, ANDREA Continued... 393663 5/1412015 135090 TRUCKENMILLER, DAVID 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371652 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393664 6114/2015 130776 WALLANDER, DONNA 170.63 ELECTION JUDGE 371653 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 170.63 393665 5/14/2016 106638 WASHBURN, VIRGINIA 219.38 ELECTION JUDGE 371654 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 219.38 393666 6/14/2016 123212 WEHRMEISTER, PAUL 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371655 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 393667 5/14/2015 130777 WENGER, WAYNE 216.56 ELECTION JUDGE 371656 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 216.56 393668 6114/2016 104630 WEXLER, ARDIS 146.25 ELECTION JUDGE 371657 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 146.25 393669 5/14/2015 136096 WILLIAMS, AMANDA 170.63 ELECTION JUDGE 371658 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 170.63 393670 5114/2015 116983 WILLIAMS, PATRICIA 173.06 ELECTION JUDGE 371659 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 173.06 393671 5/14/2015 123217 WOXLAND, KATHRYN 216.56 ELECTION JUDGE 371660 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 216.56 393672 5114/2015 104634 YEE, MARY 199.69 ELECTION JUDGE 371661 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 199.69 • • • • . • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 5/1212015 13:16:48 Council Check Register by GL Page- 45 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 5114/2016 — 6/14/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier! Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 393672 6/14/2015 104634 YEE, MARY Continued... 393673 5/14/2015 111696 ZVERINOVA, MARGARET 165.75 ELECTION JUDGE 371662 051115 1180.6013 SALARIES TEMP EMPLOYEES ELECTION 165.75 1,428,033.44 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Checks 1,133,930.89 A/PACH Payment 294,102.55 Total Payments 1,428,033.44 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and procedures date /� y1 — City M'w1 g6r 0 • 5/12/2015 13:16:57 Page- 1 0 CITY OF EDINA R55CKS2 LOGIS100 Council Check Summary 5/14/2015 - 5/14/2015 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 140,153.39 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 313.25 02600 ARTS AND CULTURE FUND 1,500.00 03100 GENERAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 450.00 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 826,742.69 04500 CANDO FUND 8,602.97 05100 ART CENTER FUND 1,485.73 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 134.18 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 25,915.50 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 26,860.52 05500 I C E AR E NA FU N D 56, 090.29 05550 SPORTS DOME FUND 3,684.74 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 12,192.24 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 5,512.02 05800 LIQUOR FUND 143,424.20 05900 UTILITY FUND 97,881.84 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 3,555.67 05950 RECYCLING FUND 36,187.38 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 19,924.98 09232 CENTENNIALTIF DISTRICT 5,205.15 09234 GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT 1,440.00 09900 PAYROLL FUND 10,776.70 Report Totals 1,428,033.44 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and procedures date /� y1 — City M'w1 g6r 0 • 5/12/2015 13:16:57 Page- 1 0 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: May 19, 2015 Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Report of April I, 2015 w91�,r� o e Voon v � )RRR Agenda Item #: IV. C. Action Requested: Review and approve the Traffic Safety Committee Report of April I, 2015. Action X❑ Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Information / Background: The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the April I, 2015 Traffic Safety Committee Report at their April 16 meeting and moved to forward the report to the City Council for approval; see attached draft minutes. Attachments: • Traffic Safety Committee Report of April I, 2015 • Draft ETC Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2015 G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Traffic Safety Committee \City Council Reports \2015 \Item IV.C. Traffic Safety Report of April 1, 2015.docx City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. - Edina, MN 55424 • 0 Traffic Safety Report Wednesday, April 01, 2015 The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on April 01. The City Engineer, Public Works Director, Transportation Planner, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Sign Coordinator, and Police Lieutenant were in attendance for this meeting. From these reviews, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, these comments can be included on the April 16 Edina Transportation Commission and the May 19 City Council agenda. Section A: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends action A I .Request for 50�h and France Lunds parking lot exit -only to be enforced This request comes from a resident who is concerned about the exit from the Lunds parking lot, onto 50th Street, in the 50th and France area. Specifically, westbound vehicles turning left into the lot were of concern, as they disobey Do -Not- Enter signs and cross traffic for this maneuver. One day of video was analyzed during the store's hours of operation, and it was seen that 33 drivers misused the exit. Seven vehicles turned left into the exit, two vehicles turned left from the exit onto 50th (also prohibited by signage and discouraged by design), and 24 vehicles turned right into the parking lot. Those turning right also commonly reversed onto 50th, or otherwise blocked through traffic on 50th as they turned into the lot. The prohibition on right turn from 50th into the parking lot is not well signed, but the design of the roadway highly discourages the movement. 611 drivers used the exit correctly during the same period. Lunds has been contacted and as of March 30th, have indicated an informal inclination to work with the city on this issue, the company's facilities manager should respond soon. 50th Street had an ADT of 10,700 for a count done in 2013. Lunds parking lot exit on 50th west, bottom is looking east. After review, staff recommends altering the signage at this location to prohibit right turns into the parking lot for eastbound, and additional enforcement will be then provided by the police department once the sign has been placed. Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page I of 14 • A2.Request for further signage on 54th Street to ensure correct use of the neighborhood traffic circles • • This request comes from a resident who is concerned about the use of the 54th Street neighborhood traffic circles, vehicles on 54th Street specifically do not yield, and turn in front of the island. One day of video was recorded and analyzed, 27 drivers turned left in front of the circle in single passenger vehicles. Larger trucks which may have issues navigating the turn are allowed to turn in front of neighborhood traffic circles and 6 drivers of these vehicles also turned in front of the traffic circle. Only one yielding issue was observed, with few conflicting vehicles reaching the intersection at times that would cause confusion over right -of -way. Other non- typical items observed include two vehicles stopping in the intersection, backing in the intersection (after missing the street the driver wished to exit on), and a pedestrian who walked to the center island of the traffic circle, and walked around its outside a full rotation before neighborhood traffic circle. continuing across the intersection. Speed was Avenue, the signage shown matches the signage seen as a possible factor, and a radar study of 50 recommended for roundabouts. vehicles, taken during midday in ideal conditions, found that the 80th -90th percentile speeds were 16 -17 miles per hour. However over 50 percent of all vehicles had speeds below 15 miles per hour (below 15 miles per hour, the radar gun no longer gives values for speeds). The signage in place matches the recommended signage from the Federal Highway Administration. After review, staff recommends adding a single chevron sign below the fish -hook sign now in place in the center island (at all four legs of both intersections). This recommendation is conditional, requiring City of Minneapolis approval. Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page 2 of 14 0 Section B : Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends denial • B 1. Request for further control at the intersection of Interlachen Boulevard and Blake Road This request comes from a resident who uses Blake to get to and from events at the Blake School. The requestor noted that traffic coming north on Blake Road to Interlachen Boulevard often has to stop and wait for an exorbitant amount of time. The requestor asked for all -way stop control to be installed at the intersection, or signal control if possible. A delay study was performed, and found that the delay to northbound vehicles on Blake Road was 19.4 seconds maximum during weekday rush hour periods. This does not meet warrants for all -way stop control or signalization. However, four -hour volume warrants for signalization of the intersection have been found to be met, the warrant will be copied and at the Traffic Safety Committee meeting, as will an Excel of both days analyzed. The congestion might be worse in summer months, however a delay study will be very difficult to conduct during the warmer months due to vegetation in the area blocking sightlines of cameras or staff placed at the intersection to investigate the issue. Sightlines were found to be acceptable in the winter; however leaves on shrubbery may cause issues in warmer months, where only 250 feet of sight distance were clear of brush, whereas the speeds on Interlachen make 410 feet needed for safe left hand turns according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in a passenger vehicle. After review, staff acknowledges that the intersection meets warrants for signalization. However, there is no notable safety issue in this location for vehicular traffic as this is more an issue of inconvenience. Staff will continue to monitor the intersection, and will consider adding signalization or stop control during a reconstruction of the intersection. Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page 3 of 14 • • • Section C : Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends further study. C (.Request for pedestrian actuation for crosswalk on Valley View Road at Chapel Lane This request comes from a resident who is concerned for safety during morning hours as school enters session. The concern is that left turning vehicles from westbound Valley View Road to southbound Chapel Lane obstruct the views of children crossing the street. When investigated, a person in the crosswalk was unable to be seen by drivers while they were at the required stopping sight distance, for approximately the central third of the roadway. Further investigation revealed that the intersection meets the City of Edina's warrants for crossings, with approximately 25 pedestrians crossing between the hours of 2:30 and 4:30 PM every day. However, mornings had a maximum of 10 crossings between the hours of 7:00 and 9:00 AM. In the morning, 80 out of 598 Plop : Vooi'ey Vic!w Rood and Chope Lone westbound vehicles turned left at this intersection between 7:00 and 9:00 on March Photo: Chapel Lane at Valley View road, looking west I Oth, which was the one day that turning data was collected. Between 7:00 and 8:00 AM there was an average of 1.33 gaps of acceptable length to cross, per five minute interval, which meets warrants for pedestrian actuation. There is a small refuge made from plastic posts in this area, but it does not comply with ADA specifications for a refuge island, and thus was not considered. The intersection of the school's parking lot exit and Valley View Road is controlled by a person during times around school release and entry, but the driveway is approximately 100 feet west of the intersection with the crosswalk in question. A 2014 count found that Valley View Road has an ADT of 7100. After review, staff concluded that while the signalization of a crosswalk would be warranted, there is the potential for confusion that would be caused by the traffic control flagger at the exit of the school's parking lot if the signal ever contradicted her /his direction. Engineering staff will discuss possible solutions with the District to provide a better walking environment for the students. D Items : Other Traffic Safety Issues Handled D 1. Requestor asked for traffic data around the intersection of 70th and Cahill. Recent counts were provided. D2. A resident of Minneapolis called to ask about the specialty crosswalks, specifically the brick imitation thermoplastic. These are no longer being placed by Edina. The requestor was forwarded the contact information for contractors who do this work. Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page 4 of 14 • D3. Requestor came into the office for traffic information on Tracy near Benton, with concerns about a child's walk to school. The counts and speeds of Tracy were provided in a spreadsheet and printed for the requestor. • • D4. Requestor noted that at night, on the sidewalk, and wearing all dark colors, a woman was difficult to see as she waited for the bus at the intersection of Parklawn Avenue and 76th Street. The lights in this location were repaired after the request was called in, and no further action was requested. D5. Requestor believes that the signs at the southbound Trunk Highway 100 entrance at Eden Avenue are backwards, and that the lower road should be required to yield as opposed to the upper road. The requestor was referred to MnDOT and told this was their right -of -way, and the City of Edina cannot change traffic control on MnDOT's right of way or highways. Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page 5 of 14 • Appendix A: Multi -Way Stop Warrants The following is from the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices • 213.7 Multi -Way Stop Applications SUPPORT: Multi -way stop control can be useful as a safety measure at intersections if certain traffic conditions exist. Safety concerns associated with multi -way stops include pedestrians, bicyclists, and all road users expecting other road users to stop. Multi -way stop control is used where the volume of traffic on the intersecting roads is approximately equal. The restrictions on the use of STOP signs described in Section 213.4 also apply to multi -way stop applications. GUIDANCE: The decision to install multi -way stop control should be based on an engineering study. The following criteria should be considered in the engineering study for a multi -way STOP sign installation: A. Where traffic control signals are justified, the multiway stop is an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the installation of the traffic control signal. B. Five or more reported crashes in a 12 -month period that are susceptible to correction by a multi -way stop installation. Such crashes include right -turn and left turn collisions as well as right -angle collisions. C. Minimum volumes: I . The vehicular volume entering the intersection from the major street approaches (total of both approaches) averages at least 300 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day; and 2. The combined vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle volume entering the intersection from the minor street approaches (total of both approaches) averages at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an average delay to minor - street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the highest hour; but 3. If the 85th - percentile approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 mph, the minimum vehicular volume warrants are 70 percent of the values provided in Items I and 2. D. Where no single criterion is satisfied, but where Criteria B, C. 1, and C.2 are all satisfied to 80 percent of the minimum values. Criterion C.3 is excluded from this condition. Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page 6 of 14 0 • 0 Appendix B : Signal Warrants, General and Four -Hour Vehicular Volume The following is from the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. General signal warrants are as follows: PART 4. 111GHWAY TRAFFIC SIGNALS Chapter 4l). 'traffic Control Signals - General 4B.11 General Wl da welt .ts padtawlyu >,nd hicyclitls ate used redutdanily in !elected scelions o Part 4 to tl vwgc seatxitivilytn iht� .. elrnrntst o "'InAr. " Standards for tactic wnnrootsignal; are important because tlati, auo,ll aiyn,lI. I." Ik' lutwt I alt antnu.nr k-ra val:tcy of road tiers, inchuhrg diw± who are oldttr, litxte vitls itnpcired �isiort, as %%vtl as those who ore faligued at disirwtcd, or who are nit expating'o cnccuntera signal at a t"'Aictllrlr tt_wolkm 4B.2 Aalsis of Installation or Itrtnoval of Traffic Ctmtrol Signals t 'i As witft the itl<,ttallation of a traffic contrd signal, a teen- prehansive lnwsligauoi and engineering study shall be completed to determine whetter to rmoroe or to retain n traffi, control sigral. �1tt'1'lrn L'` The faiVe to satisfy any warrant is not in gsell justifl�a- tron for removai of a svw. ! ?agineeringjatfgmesR should be ariplied in the review of rrlrcrtung uatTlC tOMU aigntdx to deLCrrnne WIcttter the type of inscaltatiai and die titnittg program :sect tic carr=ot rcquircmcit.sofai forms oftraffn.. If chaupcs in haffic patteris thininate the +iced lo- a tarn: connol slgsal, cotsldcrfrion should to given to ttanuvina it and replicing it with %w4riate 2ternat vc ttafro control dc%iccs, is ttny arc neekd. If the caginccaing stuly trwicalesthat the irallc control signal is rm longer jaatified, and a decis;on is made to renKvc the signal, removal should to acccmplisled using Iltc Wlnwiag steps: A Drimmine the at,4arrtprintr traffic rrnlrnl Ic. he nsrd after removal ol'the signtl. H Rendavc aw sialst- distacec tesnictiorn as neccum_ C Inform the -)uhlic of the nerno al stud}. L]_ Flnsh or cones the silty head: for a minimum of9() days, :old irstnll Ihc app mpnate %trop :ontty' or oticr traffic crantrll devices, AI way rpd ffash OwAkt not be usedunleas the intent Isto have an al way stop after Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 ERR the removal of the skanal. E. Relvove tle aiglml if tie ongnccrir�g data cape,ted during the removal study pciiad confirms that the %igrgl *s nr lon�+r jtustld!J OF't'lUV: 119C0113C horns C. D. and L Wove are not relevant whin a tcinpor•.uy ituffic control signal (sx Section 411,321 is rcuwvcd, a tua?trccary Itxftic cntruul signal .uay ba scasamd inuncdiate}y after ltcrnsA and B arc aomploed. lrstead of total rcnuval of a traffic eoitrol signal, the poles, uoauroller cabinet, and cables may rcmair in place ancr re uoW of the siftial heals tot 7nnfnucd atnalysrs 48.3 Advontage. and bkadvantages of Traffic Control Signals Vutten ploperty used, name control signals arc valusbic devices for the control if vehicular and pedestrian traffic_ Tslo; w:iibn dlc tiytlr of -way to Ott vmivw Nark nn wntenti and thereby ptufotndly iaflucnce traffic; flov, Traffic cmlrul tiynals that arc prorkrly dt cignce, (ocawrl, operated, and nuiruaincd will have one .w tutee of The totlotvmg advantages: A. Tlse>, twoviie for lie ometly rnaveount of tatiic_ C. The* incrrasc tl!c traf ic•hardling :apaci =y of the inicuccticm if: 1. Priper lliysica tayoms andc(zttnd mcrsurcx are used, alai 2. Th: sigrul operational par7m.ters are reviewod ind ul•tletcd (ir rceded) on a rcgitlar lasis ',as engineering judgntcn. tlewrminez that stytnificint trrffnc -low and or land use changes live vwwrcd) to taaaiutim the ability of Cic uld iv ccattrol signal 1) satisy° cure :nt traTnc dcntands t'. Th.) rcdlut Ihc. ficylecrty nut :acuity Cr t4Tt4irt typcsof etaibes, cipccialy rigPt -atngk collisianes. C. They we eoordimted to provide for contnuoua or nearF' continuous tnovencnt cf traffic at s definite speed oltmg a ltivest roue under favewAte crndain w. E T'licy arc us-M to iatm aill hea q trafPt at bucrvals 10 permit olhcs traffic, vehicular o pedestrian, o doss. Trlffic control signals arc olien considcroJ a panacea .`or all traffic pmbtcns at itactse 6onst. Thi;t bead hus led to uaffiC cttmtvl sibsrals lying nstallotl at many lot. -ohms where they are not needed, adversely affecArg the safety aid cMciency of vehicubr, bicycle, and r4*41rimi traf-tc. t/tttubtr, 211111 Page 7 of 14 • • • Traffic control signals, oven when justified by lraffec and rom ay :otkfilions, wm be ill- dcsijmcd, incffectiirly placed, imprmNrly aperaltd, at portly eruintaircd Imp-oper or unjustifted Itafc control aigrals car mill in one or more of the follca•ing disadwrilagef: A Fvr.�civerlrlay: H, F'wmsivc AAab;:Jiunceof the signal indicrtions; C. Increased uw of less idequxt: mules as remit userx aticript to Avoid tretiaffic cotttol Signals; atki D, Signifecan; incnatsts is the hcquercy of collisions (opecitdly tear -end col lisionsl 4&d Alirrnativrx toM- 3aflir d-'nrtIrn' Signals i[7lUANtg! Surer whicula delta} and Ite frtvtrency •yf sxxre tyrses of crashes are sometimes greater undo traffic signal conrol than undcrSTOP sign control, • .,onsid.rafion shouli be given to poavidirg ultcmatiw* to fra llik coiirol s3Srols even if one or more ofthe signal csarr-tusls 11a0 been satitficd. pPTKYY: hm ateraao cs nuy uwltde, but are n)t l ni ted to, the following; A. inM411iing signs long the ttulfar street to %,nm toad uscn apprrstchinp the intertccoon; ft. kelt= ing the stop linelal and makhg odor chanofi to inprove (lie sight distutec a: the irtersee ion; C. Instill. ng mcasutzs designed I.) reduce speeds on the approaches A. Instilling a fialhing hmcon at the inlcrccticri Its supplement STOP sign control. 1. Imulling flailsiug bum-i tt act xaning sign+ iu adsance of a ST]P sign conrolicd intersection on mujtr- nnd•br mlm'otroml apprnuehcr; F. AM % one nr more lanai on it trsinmr street approach to roluce the nu.nhei of va:hictea per late: out :ha approach: U. Revising Ilut giometricc n the inuatmfwlinn to cliao:iclixc tchictrar inn: cnsents and reduce the Bite vmuivd fat a vehicle to winplrtc o niaarnecni, wh els could also issist pedestrians; I . Rcv,sing lie gcomielrks at tkc intcvscok'" In add pedeutian median mtitge islands andeor curb cxtersions; 1. Installing :oadwiy lighting if a cisprolorlionite nwnhcr of trashesoccurat night; J. Restricting •roc or mare turninj movenu nts, perh:.ps on a tine- of -dar basis, if alternilc fcutcs are mailable, K. If slit warrant is sitisf o(, installing rndti -tiucy STOP aigrt erurtt14 lretrnber, 2011 Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 4134 L. Installing a pedesrian Irfbrid beacon (%cc Chapter aF) or rkhar pedesUan safety Vaturts if pedLinian safety is (IV major cox -ra; M. hoildling a saundabout; and N. Employi it; oilier altcrnalivcs, dcperding on condlions it the iuersc:tion. 4B.5 Adeyuate Roadway Capaelty tct Pri>Kt� Tw delaye inherent iu flit. alrtxualiig accignme.id arri .lit - of tray- at itterscclinns xtntrolled by traffic c +Hato] sigials can ;requestly be reduc.d by widening tlw maimr ivaduav, the minor madwry, or loth roadways. Wici`ning ite rahor roadway open bcecfits tie operationson thetnajorroad"Ity, bepsaitic It -educes the irecn lime Our Inuai he atsiglaec so minor- rrtad.vay traffic. In wbae areas, flit t6eet mftviduting can be nekieved by eliminating parking on imeraection appr3achcs it is dcsirablc to have at feast two Ganes for moving tratrc nn each apprXisch to At stguitiimd hr:ntinn. Additional width on the dtrratt tre sidz of tht inttraeetion as well ter au Iltc atr:iruaclt ai&-, will Kwrciinr-s in nec-iaed to clear traffic tltrough the interscetion tifecriuly, FGiiTJ�ij sipfilized 6cation. He6tae art intewedan k wid:ned, chic additional Ireen t me prlemrians peel to crass the widened madwuys should 4e coriA. -red to deltrminc if it w Il exceed the preen line sa wd through Hiprilved vOmailnr loin Ohcr methods of increasing lie. roadway ulrncity at elprtsli.sed ka4aeinntt that do aft iuvaik,•a tpalway widoni tit, such as rcvsioln to Ilse pavement nuticiagsand Ile cardui evahrarinn of pmrrrr Inne_ucr atetigninente (ischttling varying the lane Ise by time of daffy), shouli be cansiderad where appropriate, Such cttacxidersiinn ohnuld inchdc evaluation of cry inspacts Ilia[ ulkanges to Iavcmtnt markings tad lane assignments will have on bicycle travel. Page 8 of 14 • • • The following three pages are from the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and relate to Four -hour and Peak Hour warrants for signals. MINOR CTnECT HIGHER - VOLLIME APPROACH- VP-4 160 1001_ I C I I 1 I I �- 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LADIES 2 OR MORE LANES 8, 1 LhNE 1 LANE 4. 1 LANE 3f: -` nr)* MA. OR STREET -- TOTAL OF BOTH APPROA ,HEE — VEHICLES PER HDUR (VF-H) *W'tl�; 11,5 vph ap" as the kwsr Ihrt,ShotJ vo1um9 is a m1nur =stree approach Wth two or more lanes and 80 vph apFlies as the hover tl'resho d wAunA for p Mlh oft'* lar'0' Moire 4C•1. W'arrart 2 = Fuur Harif VeWcula• Vbfuma (f ONMUNiTY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 43 1APH ON %IAJCR STREETI son MINO„z STREET H i -iHEK- 250 VOLLIhiE APFROXI H - VPtI IlecemLer= Al l 100 '2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE Rn* oc h1AJM' STREE° -- TOTAL OF BOTH APPROAC H1=S — VEHICLES PER HOUR (\,'PH) -riil it:: ti(,) vph applies as the lovrv.r 1hreshol0 wAtime for f mtrvj-- street approach wish hvo cr more lanes anti 60 vp1 appl es as She kwec thrnshold "umr. for n appron6h ~with ore lair. Flyrry 4C,2. WalrarrrR - Fwr•!luNr 1A flar+rr , V.4 v (7075 Feral.+,) Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 4C4 Page 9 of 14 • 0 • 3. The vchicks per hour given it built )( tin t+0 per =m colctntu of Condition 3 in 'fable 42 -1 ctist orit the major- street anl the highe-- valune minor - street upprowhcs, respecrivcl!, to Ilia intcriectior. ?Ile w rutjor :4rcct nut nrinttrstnrt volumes shall be for rite uatne 4 hotus for =tell cotditior, howtver, the 8 hours sattxlied to Condition A shall trot be requirtd to U. the suite K hmtrs solisfiad in C'oiw itian H. Cat the minor street rite hilftr voustic :hall rut be rtxlulrcd in is on the -mine approach during each of the 9 houm. c:t�l'to�t_.I I rthe pcateeM or varcrory spied lit it or th- 951h- p- rcentile spctd on the riuj )t sliest excesds 40 rnph, or if the intur cc. tionlies Within tae buit -ula area ofan isolated conunwity having a population of .css dun 10,(00, the traffic volunlCs in tic 56 perQt-W columns in Tablc 4C^i may be nsrl in place of the 80 percent = columns. 4C3 Warrant !, Four -Hotn- Vchicul u' Volume FHt'PPriUT: The tour -Hr:ur vehicuL:r W;umc signal warrant conditions are indicted to he applied %lie c the rolunic of intctsct:ting nark is timer p inciptt icuun to can -klLt instilling r lrairk conth ?I signil. Tw awed for a traffic comwal sigort shall be a oueidercl if all cgghwe,ing gWy freer Ilan for each urany 4 Kikir5 ri'an avenge d.w. thw Noted points repre!entinc the vehicles per hour on th_ major stred (total of bob appioachci) anti the corrtsponiJiing velticlei per lour or the highcr•vulumc minomercet ,apprn:tch (erne direction tally) all full above Iho appl cable .tarn= in Figure 4C for the existing conbinaton or approadt lanct. On ate nslaar sure[, flit higiur Will= shall not be tcquiwd to be nn Ik nom ., appr<ach doing etch or Ihrx 4 ►aura, ifthe pasted orstatutory sped limit or the 85th-perecivile spet3 on tit major siren exceirtds 40 mph or Willie intersec• Lion lies w1hin it c buil:-up Tina of in isolrled commwity having a population of loss than 10,00, Figure 4C-2 may be used In pla.c of Figutc 4t- -1. 4C.4 'Warrant ?, Pcak How St.NPC7HY: Tic Peak Ilour rind Warrant is m crick -d for use it a location wheat :raffle cond'nions arc such [tat for a miiaerium of I hour of an overage day, the minim- slteut Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 4CA hatlk: sulltrs urduc delay When cntcrhig (x crossing the major street Thir rigiol wo runt s1a116eapplicl onlyin unusual cars. .Such cones Include, but ore not linilted to, =fil=e camplctcs, ntarufaeturing plants, induiliiai cumpexes, or high - occupancy, vehicc faciities that attract of disebirge large uur•bcn o' vehicles over a strut liars, 7hc noel for a trafficcontrol sibruil shall be eoitsid: real if an cnpirwtrinir shaly fiuli tltat the ;riluni in cilia of the folhnving Mm csuLyurico Are met: A Ira I ihree of tier. fallowirttt twidiiiim exst Inrthe.. 'ante l Itmr (ally roar Lronxecu.ive ISnnistute periods) of at avemi, &v. 1. Tie total stoMed time delay expericrund by the tmfiic on one iiiiiutr- itruci approach (one direction oily) emttr ollal by aSMI'sign equals cr exceeds: 4 whi=le -hou s for it ow -cane appiolich, or 5 whi=le -hoots for a two -lute appt+taclt, aid 2. Tte vohtmc on the sari = minor -straw approach (me it icclina onlyi ecluak or exceeds 100 vdoicles per hour for nnc moving hate of ttaff t or l Sit vehi:les Fla trUUl fur to +r inoving to ics. seal 3. Tic. total entering volume staviced during tit= hour quak cr cxcc:de dSri vchi:tcr par hr,ur for invi- sictiota_3with twee anvoachcsor 800 vehicles per hour far intersectioats with four or atone approaches. It The plotted Isnitir representing thr "hides per hiur an Wr tmajt r slrtd (iota of both opp•vachcs) and the Loo its widinIt whicics rcr hour on tls hitthtr -v unlic minor -su=et rtppriach (cne direction only) for 1 h3ut (any four consecutive 15- minute periods) of an ave"itc day falis rbove Nit apphcrablt 6UT"in Fiiplre 4C -3 for the existing combiiiat an of tpprtie_h lento trrnnri� Vibe rimiccl or untulerry sloe :d lnnit nr the RSrh•percewile slice +t un tit_ major strec cxcctds 40 uph, r-r if the bactsnc. tion lies within tl!c built -up aria of inn isolated ecnrmurity hnviag a populatiom of less than 10.000. Figure 4C4 maybe owd in plarc t+t' Figum 4C-3 to salisfy the criteria in the sectwd cattgory (if rise 1"ndW, i liie,o: rr:u,r Ie Ilw —ly t-omnt anal earls 9rafla• r`t +n}rst signal is juitifrcd by an crrgincriii% study, tire fraffc croatrol signrl may b; operated in tie flashing n'odc daring :he hours that 6c vohmc crwris of this warru t arc nit rnct � Ci1JrrAP1CC �: 1; this ivanart is lie only warrant na_t and a tial ie connol sigrsl is justified by an engintering study, the traffic ==email signal shmild be In►rricractuntod. Omen ber,2011 Page 10 of 14 0 • • C -00 50U IAINOR STREET 400 "GHER- V7JLUME 3DD APPROACH - VPH 200 1100 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE L.WES ,•2 OR MORE ' -AN S & 1 LANE -,I 'I ANF h 1 I ANF 150* 106* `Vll k'-W iwv 1..614 IIM. 1[16111 MAJOR CT:IEET TOTAL OF BOTH APFROA,,'HES VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) ,NnTF• I."vph upplins n% tM lrY1eRr Ihr;KhnHvnhumn fnr a minnr- strrvI approach vlh Iwo or more lanes and 100 vph appNas as the lower threshold volume for a rinor -streel approach with ors lane. Figure 4C -3. Warrant 3 . Peak Hour (COMMUNITYLESSTHAti 10,000 POPULATON 01 ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET) 4(D MINOR STREET HliiHkf ;• Ju VOLUME 4PPROAGH- VPH 210 Tleeear6er, 3011 10 OR MORE LANES & 2 CR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE ,1 LANE & 1 LANE 110k 75* MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES -- VEHOLES PEP. HOUR (M-H) *NOTE_ 107 vph applies as M3 lcmer threshold VALIMe for a minor -sset I approach ba th two crmore lanes and 75 vph apples as Ih3lowo, thnesle volume fora niner- street approach with one 5ne. r-&.— 4C-4. M—,d 3 • P.r.IA 'h.— (705$ r*,Id ) Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 4C -6 Page I I of 14 • Appendix C : Interlachen Boulevard and Blake Road • Table I, 12 -hour intersection turning movements count, from 9 -9 -14 Time WB Right WB Thru WB Left NB Right NB Thru NB Left EB Right EB Thru EB Left Blake Left Turns Blake Entering (hour long) Interlachen Entering (hourlong) 6:00 0 8 2 5 0 9 3 7 0 38 65 189 6:15 0 9 5 5 0 4 3 13 0 57 101 262 6:30 0 20 6 8 0 4 3 22 0 81 147 382 6:45 0 36 II 9 0 21 7 34 0 122 203 493 7:00 1 46 II 22 0 28 11 24 0 143 237 618 7:15 0 61 18 27 0 28 17 54 0 161 250 787 7:30 0 66 18 23 0 45 19 59 0 191 278 886 7:45 0 108 26 22 0 42 18 61 0 185 267 971 8:00 0 123 32 17 0 46 31 76 0 187 274 962 8:15 0 123 30 25 0 58 27 69 0 167 266 850 8:30 0 114 33 18 0 39 20 80 0 139 231 717 8:45 0 95 27 27 0 44 II 70 1 129 218 575 9:00 0 59 15 29 0 26 27 49 0 102 188 478 9:15 0 46 19 18 0 30 19 32 0 95 172 435 9:30 0 49 II 15 29 12 33 0 87 162 415 9:45 0 37 17 24 17 7 46 0 90 166 391 10:00 0 41 13 20 19 13 40 0 91 159 388 10:15 0 35 18 16 22 9 34 0 93 156 395 10:30 0 33 14 16 32 7 27 0 88 151 399 10:45 0 38 13 16 18 12 41 0 73 149 421 11:00 0 47 10 15 21 II 46 0 77 154 424 11:15 0 40 12 16 17 13 35 0 82 158 431 11:30 0 43 14 29 17 13 32 1 90 166 460 11:45 1 26 30 17 22 22 28 0 90 163 467 12:00 0 49 13 14 26 21 38 0 101 180 486 12:15 0 48 17 16 25 28 36 0 99 189 479 12:30 0 36 14 26 17 27 33 0 96 182 487 12:45 0 41 24 23 33 13 48 0 109 184 502 13:00 0 45 18 25 24 17 34 0 93 167 468 13:15 0 47 26 12 22 23 41 0 96 157 489 13:30 0 52 24 15 0 30 17 32 0 99 162 482 13:45 0 30 18 22 0 17 10 34 0 88 147 470 14:00 0 51 25 12 0 27 24 35 0 91 147 496 14:15 0 48 23 14 0 25 17 42 0 85 148 516 14:30 0 52 17 II 0 19 19 25 0 97 158 551 14:45 0 40 15 19 0 20 19 43 1 119 191 632 Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page 12 of 14 • 0 15:00 0 58 20 18 1 21 24 53 0 138 213 754 15:15 0 64 27 12 0 37 19 55 0 163 247 802 15:30 0 83 30 22 0 41 26 55 0 174 265 868 15:45 0 65 31 22 0 39 45 99 0 179 271 873 16:00 0 71 23 28 0 46 33 76 0 189 289 876 16:15 0 80 24 19 0 48 35 92 0 186 284 954 16:30 0 81 19 23 0 46 30 69 0 182 289 1040 16:45 0 104 24 30 0 49 29 86 0 186 271 1116 17:00 0 100 43 26 0 43 30 108 0 189 289 1147 17:15 0 117 28 34 0 44 31 140 1 187 284 1095 17:30 0 100 40 29 1 50 27 108 0 143 244 778 17:45 0 100 41 34 0 52 23 110 0 125 217 619 18:00 0 76 33 37 0 41 32 88 0 116 201 489 Table 2. 12 -hour intersection turning movements count, from 9-11-14, this was done to ensure that these volumes are a normal condition, and thus times when signals were unwarranted on 9 -9 -14 were not analyzed. Time WB Right WB Thru WB Left NB Right NB Thru NB Left EB Right EB Thru EB Left Blake Left Turns Blake Entering (hour long) Interlachen Entering (hourlong) 6:00 0 6 1 6 0 6 1 9 0 37 68 170 6:15 0 9 0 8 0 8 3 15 0 54 III 243 6:30 1 0 16 1 6 9 1 0 6 1 0 21 0 69 138 343 6:45 0 34 14 8 0 17 7 28 0 103 184 483 7:00 0 33 12 32 0 23 14 31 0 131 227 619 7:15 0 51 27 20 0 23 13 36 0 147 239 781 7:30 0 87 22 21 0 40 19 55 0 159 246 902 7:45 0 110 29 23 0 45 14 66 0 151 244 934 8:00 0 128 39 28 0 39 24 61 0 143 234 872 8:15 0 129 23 15 0 35 26 70 0 136 225 758 8:30 0 86 29 27 0 32 25 75 0 125 217 619 8:45 0 79 10 21 0 37 19 49 0 116 201 489 9:00 0 51 19 26 0 32 17 51 0 100 179 434 9:15 0 31 18 18 0 24 16 44 0 68 121 296 9:30 0 36 8 20 0 23 5 36 0 44 79 187 9:45 14:30 0 0 48 37 15 16 14 18 1 0 21 9 23 19 30 26 0 0 21 III 36 189 102 512 14:45 0 54 25 21 0 25 17 32 0 138 218 612 15:00 0 56 21 17 0 24 23 33 0 149 237 717 15:15 0 57 31 21 1 39 20 45 0 168 263 789 15:30 0 91 23 20 0 50 27 57 0 187 282 873 Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page 13 of 14 • • • 15:45 0 62 30 29 0 36 45 96 0 197 297 917 16:00 0 82 17 24 0 43 27 79 0 217 311 941 16:15 0 106 25 22 0 58 31 75 0 231 317 992 16:30 0 120 16 25 0 60 26 80 0 226 315 1039 16:45 0 102 18 23 0 56 26 III 0 228 322 1072 17:00 1 108 19 16 0 57 28 100 0 224 328 1078 17:15 0 96 21 25 0 53 28 139 0 205 313 1026 17:30 0 93 24 30 0 62 39 119 0 152 235 742 17:45 0 102 29 33 0 52 33 99 0 18:00 0 74 27 20 0 38 21 82 0 Traffic Safety Report of April 2015 Page 14 of 14 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS APRIL 16, 2015 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were members Bass, Boettge, lyer, Janovy, La Force, Loeffelholz, Nelson, Olson, and Spanhake. ABSENT Campbell and Rummel Traffic Safety Report of April 1, 2015 B.1. Member Janovy asked about clearing the brushes and planner Nolan said the current clearing schedule is twice annually and public works will increase this to four clearings. B.2. Member Janovy said it wasn't clear what the recommendation was. Planner Nolan said the area meets warrant for a flashing beacon but it would interfere with the crossing guard that is there. He said director Millner spoke with the school district about doing a joint traffic study and they are considering it. The cost would be $60,000 split equally between the school district and the city. Member Spanhake suggested moving this to C.1. Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member lyer to forward the April 1, 2015, TSC report to the City Council. All voted aye. 0 Motion carried. Updates Student Members — None. Bike Edina Working Group Member Janovy said Bloomington Public Health has funding for temporary bike parking and they are working out logistics. They are planning a handlebar assessment of bike routes later this month and interested participants can contact her. Living Streets Working Group Planner Nolan said the draft plan was presented to the Planning Commission. He said communications & technology (CTS) is doing the final edits and graphic placement. The plan will be submitted to City Council on Apr. 21 and a public hearing is scheduled for May 6. Feedback will be taken on Speak Up, Edina! Walk Edina Working Group — None. • To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL From: Chad A. Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Date: May 19, 2015 A,11�1'� o e '�OORPORF`�� IABA Agenda Item #: IV. D. Action ❑x Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Subject: Authorize Engineering Services for Tracy Avenue, Valley View Road & Valley Lane Intersection Improvements Action Requested: Authorize City Manager to sign attached proposal for engineering services. Information / Background: Please recall our discussion at the April 21 council meeting about coming back with a professional services proposal for this project. Due to their existing work with Three Rivers Park District (TRPD) on the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail (NMCRT) that we were able to get benefit from, SEH provided a proposal for final design and bidding services for the Tracy Avenue, Valley View Road & Valley Lane intersection improvements. The design will include a roundabout that will incorporate the TRPD's NMCRT. The roundabout greatly improves several concerns related to traffic speeds, traffic queuing from Valley Lane onto Tracy Avenue and trail users crossing the intersection. Utility improvements include replacing the box culvert under Valley Lane that carries the Nine Mile Creek, and upgrades to the storm sewer and water main systems. The project will be funded by a combination of Three Rivers Park District, Municipal State Aid, Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund, and utility funds. It is listed in the Capital Improvement Plan under Project #'s 15- 15 I and 15 -165. Attachment: SEH Proposal Letter Dated May 12, 2015 G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV \PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \BA430 ValleyView_Tracy Inters Imp\ADMIN \MISC \Item IV. D. ENG Svcs.docx City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 A 0 E Building a Better World for All of Us' SUPPLEMENTAL LETTER AGREEMENT May 12, 2015 Mr. Chad Millner, PE Director of Engineering City of Edina Engineering and Public Works Facility 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 Dear Chad: RE: City of Edina 2016 Tracy Avenue, Valley View Road and Valley Lane Intersection Improvements BA -430 SEH No. EDINA131821 10.00 • Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH®) is pleased to submit the attached proposal for the final design, bidding document production and bidding assistance portion of the referenced project. 0 If accepted, this supplemental letter agreement describes how we will provide these services for a not -to- exceed fee of $237,295.00. This amount is detailed in the attached Task Hour Budget (THB) and includes all reimbursable expenses. We will bill the City monthly for reimbursable expenses and on an hourly basis for labor. We will provide these services in accordance with our Agreement for Professional Engineering Services dated June 4, 2013, herein called the Agreement. The project includes the realignment of the Tracy Avenue, Valley View Road and Valley Lane intersection with a roundabout and will incorporate Three Rivers Park District's Nine Mile Creek Regional trail (trail). The roundabout solves several concerns related to traffic speeds, traffic queuing from Valley Lane onto Tracy Avenue and trail users crossing the intersection. Also included in the project is the replacement of the box culvert under Valley Lane that carries Nine Mile Creek and includes upgrades to the storm sewer and water main systems in the project area. The project is funded through a combination of the City's Municipal State Aid, Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS), and utility funds and by Three Rivers Park District for their portion related to the trail. The project's final design will encompass several technical challenges including the roundabout, retaining walls, box culvert and watermain installation under Nine Mile Creek. Extensive coordination with agency stakeholders including the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and Three Rivers Park District will be required to ensure a successful project. Engineers I Architects I Planners I Scientists Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 300, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9302 SEH is 100% employee -owned I sehinc.com 1 952.912.2600 1 800.734.6757 1 888.908.8166 fax Mr. Chad Millner, PE May 12, 2015 is Page 2 We understand the City wants to conduct a bid opening in February 2016 to ensure a competitive bidding environment. In order to reach this goal, we have developed the following anticipated project production schedule in the table below. Anticipated Project Schedule Work Item No. Work Item Description Work Item Key Milestone Date 1 Begin Data Collection/Bidding Documents May 20, 2015 2 Present 30% Design to Edina Transportation Commission August 20, 2015 3 Mail update memorandum to affected residents August 21, 2015 4 Present 60% Design to Edina Transportation Commission September 17, 2015 5 60% Plan Submittal to State Aid / TRPD September 18, 2015 6 Neighborhood Meeting October 8, 2015 7 100% Plan Submittal to State Aid / TRPD December 7, 2015 8 Begin Advertising for Bids January 12, 2016 9 Open Bids February 2, 2016 10 Award Construction Contract February 16, 2016 11 Begin Construction Aril 2016 12 Substantially Complete Construction September 2016 • This Supplemental Letter Agreement, THB, and the Agreement represent the entire understanding between the City of Edina and SEH in respect to the project and may only be modified in writing if signed by both parties. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to present this supplemental letter agreement for bid documents and bidding assistance. Please contact me at 952.912.2616 or tmuse sehinc.com with questions regarding this proposal.. Sincerely, SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. 66-)—, TJMu PE P ager c: Eric Nelson, Three Rivers Park District p: \ae \e \edina \131821 \1 - genl \10 - setup - cont \03- proposal \fnl sla Itr tracy valley rab 5 12 15.docx Accepted on this _day of , 2015 City of Edina, Minnesota • By. Name 0 A SEH r1 U 0 Task Hour Budget City of Edina 2016 Tracy Avenue, Valley View Road and Valley Lane Intersection Improvement No: BA -430 May 12, 2015 Page 1 of 5 PROJECT TASKS ESTIMATED COST Bid Document Services 1.0 Final Design Tasks 1.1 Data Collection 1.1.1 Obtain Utility as- builts from City 1 1.1.2 Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan dated 7/03 prepared by BARR Engineering for the project area 1.1.3 Sanitary sewer manhole structure survey data 1.1.4 Previous soil boring logs and /or test results 1 1.1.5 Traffic and pedestrian counts 1.1.5.1 24 hour tube counts & intersection video 1 2 1.1.5.2 Conduct AM and PM peak period counts from intersection video 1.1.5.3 Warrant Analysis based on tube counts 1.1.5.4 Safety Analysis 1.1.5.5 Prepare 2036 Traffic Forecast 1.1.5.6 1 Prepare Roundabout Justification Report 1.1.13 Wetland Delineation 1.2 Gopher State One Call 1.2.1 Obtain Ticket No. for Gopher State One Call 1.2.2 Collect atlases from private utility companies in the project area 1.3 Topographic Survey (3) 1.3.1 Tracy Avenue culvert condition assessment (4) 1.4 Geotechnical Investigation 5 1.4.1 Review previous soil boring logs and /or test results 1.4.2 Develop eotechnical drilling/testing drilling/testing scope 1.4.3 Prepare drilling location maps 1.4.4 Coordination with City and Braun prior to drilling 1.4.5 Coordination with Braun during drilling 1.4.7 Soil sample review and lab testing assignment 1.4.8 Lab testing review 1.5 Street / Pavement Design (6) (7) (8) 1.5.1 Roundabout 1.5.1.1 Refine roundabout geometric design based on RODEL using 2036 traffic demands 1.5.2 Valley Lane 1.6 Drainage / Storm Sewer Design 9 1.6.1 Storm Sewer and Temporary Creek Bypass Design 1.6.2 Storm water basin design 10 1.7 Water Main Design 11 1.8 Lighting Design 1.9 Structural Design (12) 1.9.2 Box Culvert - Tracy Avenue (13) 1.9.3 Box Culvert - Valley Lane (14) 1.9.4 Concrete Head -Wall - Tracy Avenue Page 1 of 5 • F-1 LJ r1 U Page 2 of 5 PROJECT TASKS ESTIMATED COST 1.10 Geotechnical Design 1.10.1 Develop Site Strati raph /Soil Parameters 1.10.2 Internal Coordination 1.10.3 Evaluate Dewatering and Creek Diversion Plan 1.10.4 Evaluate Sub grade and Pavement 1.10.5 Evaluate Roundabout Retaining Walls 1.10.6 Evaluate Valley Lane Box Culvert Foundations 1.10.7 Prepare Geotechnical Memorandum 1.11 Landscaping 1.11.1 Roundabout (15) Subtotal Labor Cost $61,638 2.0 Meetings 2.1 Kick -off meeting with City/TRPD staff (16) 2.2 Email private utility companies 17 2.3 MnDOT State Aid - Confirm Roundabout Eligibility 2.4 MnDOT State Aid Design Review 2.5 Neighborhood Meeting 18 2.5.1 Prepare plots summarizing improvements for use at the meeting (19) 2.5.2 Attendance at Neighborhood Meeting 20 2.7 City Staff, City Boards and Commission Meetings, and other Agency Meetings 2.7.1 Transportation Commission Meeting 2.7.2 Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Meeting 21 Subtotal Labor Cost $10,132 3.0 Bid Document Preparation 3.1 Plan sheets 3.1.1 Title Sheet 3.1.2 General Layout 3.1.3 Statement of Estimated Quantities 3.1.4 Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan 3.1.5 Detour Plan 3.1.6 Tabulation of earthwork 3.1.7 Tabulation of existing sanitary and storm sewer structure reconstruction or adjustment 3.1.8 Tabulation of removals and miscellaneous restoration 3.1.9 Typical pavement sections & List of standard plates 3.1.10 Alignment Plan 3.1.11 Construction Notes and MnDOT Standard Plans 3.1.12 Miscellaneous Details 3.1.13 Signing and Striping Plan and Tabulation 3.1.14 Concrete Head Wall - Tracy Avenue 3.1.15 Box Culvert - Valley Lane 3.1.16 Water main Reconstruction Plan 3.1.17 Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan 3.1.18 Plan and Profile sheets and Cross Sections 3.1.19 Intersection Details 31.20 Ped Ramp Details 3.1.21 Trail Crossing Flasher Plan RRFB 3.1.22 Lighting Plan 3.1.23 Roundabout Landscaping Plan 3.2 Project Manual 3.2.1 Front End 22 3.2.2 Bidding Requirements 23 3.2.3 Conditions of Contract 3.2.4 Specifications 3.2.5 Special Provisions Page 2 of 5 • • Page 3 of 5 PROJECT TASKS ESTIMATED COST 3.2.6 Appendix Subtotal Labor Cost $103,449 4.0 Quantities and Opinion of Probable Cost (24) 4.1 Opinion of Probable Cost and Proposal Form 4.1.1 Streets 4.1.1.1 Roundabout 4.1.1.2 Valley Lane 4.1.2 Storm Sewer 4.1.3 Water Main 4.1.5 Retainin Wall - Tracy Avenue 4.1.6 Box Culvert - Valley Lane 4.1.7 Roundabout Landscaping 4.1.8 Lighting Subtotal Labor Cost $10,156 5.0 Agency Review / Submittals 5.1 Cit of Edina 25 5.2 State Aid 5.3 Three Rivers Park District 25 5.4 Nine Mile Creek Watershed District 5.4.1 Hydraulic Modeling 5.4.1.1 Review Current NMCWD XPSWMM Model (27) 5.4.1.2 Create existing (pre-project) conditions using HY -8 (26) 5.4.1.3 Size new culvert crossing for Valley Lane (28) 5.4.1.4 Create proposed (post-project) conditions HY -8 model (29) 5.4.1.5 QA /QC 30 5.4.1.6 Prepare Design Memorandum and Figures 5.5.1 Permitting Tasks 5.5.1.1 Calculate Compensatory Storage Requirements 5.5.1.2 Determine Mitigation Site 31 5.5.1.3 QA /QC 31 5.5.1.4 Prepare Compensatory Storage Figures 5.5.1.5 Prepare Technical Memorandum and Application (31) 5.5.1.6 Initial NMCWD Coordination 5.5.1.7 NMCWD Permit Coordination /Comments 5.5.1.8 MnDNR Public Waters Permit Submittal document Preparation 5.5.1.9 MnDNR Public Waters Permit Coordination /Comments 5.5.1.10 USACE Permit Coordination /Comments 5.5 Private Utility Companies 5.6 MPCA 5.6.1 NPDES Permit /SWPPP Subtotal Labor Cost $35,232 6.0 Bidding Assistance 6.1 Prepare Ad for Bids 6.2 Prepare Electronic Bid Documents 32 6.2.1 Plans 6.2.2 Project Manual 6.3 Respond to Bid Inquires 6.4 Prepare Addenda 6.5 lAttend Bid Opening 6.6 1 Prepare Tabulation of Bids Subtotal Labor Cost $2,572 Page 3 of 5 0 P:\AE \E\ Edina\ 131821\ 1 - genl \10 - setup - cont \03 - proposal \[SEH THB Tracy Valley RAB Bid Docs Council.xlsx]Hours -Costs NOTES 1 Task completed by City and provided to SEH 2 Counts will occur during May with school still in session 3 A majority of the project area has already been surveyed in conjunction with the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail (NMCRT) project. We will only collect topographic survey where necessary to supplement this data. Includes topographic survey of existing culverts under Tracy Avenue and Valley Lane and upstream creek cross sections. 4 A pipe condition assessment of the Tracy Avenue culvert will not be completed due to the presence of existing standing water inside the culvert. In order to obtain a thorough analysis of the culvert, either a temporary cofferdam, diver, or subconsultant who specializes in robotic video in under -water conditions would be required. Due to budget constraints, we have not included this scope of work in our work plan. 5 SEH will contract directly with Braun Intertec for soil borings and laboratory testing. 6 We will use the December 2014 preliminary roundabout concept we developed with staff as the basis for our final roundabout design. 7 Horizontal and vertical alignments will be assigned to all streets in the project area. 8 Design shall adhere to MnDOT State Aid design standards. 9 Complete the detailed design of storm sewer extensions and /or new systems per State Aid hydraulic design standards 10 Basin design for treatment purposes should not be needed based on the decrease of impervious area created by the project. Given the elevation drop to the creek, we anticipate the design of a basin to provide energy dissipation. 11 Based on discussions with staff, we understand all water main in the project area will be replaced. This includes design of directional drilled water main under Nine Mile Creek at Valley Lane. This includes replacement of the main /hydrant located on the New City Convenant Church property. This task assumes the water main pipe and hydrant are located in an existing utility easement. No easement tasks are included in this scope of work including but not limited to graphics, survey, legal descriptions, appraisals, etc. 12 Does not include final design /bid document production of a pedestrian bridge since the box culvert at Valley Lane will be extended. 13 The existing culvert under Tracy Avenue will be left in place. Our scope of work does not include design /bid document production for the rehabilitation (lining) or reconstruction (dig and replace) of this culvert. 14 Based on discussions City staff have conducted with Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, our scope of work for the replacement of this culvert assumes replacement in kind that matches the existing width and height of the culvert, no custom precast concrete wingwall will be required on the upstream side of the culvert and a standard MnDOT end section will be installed on the downstream side. 15 Assumes landscaping plan is limited to only the center median of the roundabout. Does not include additional landscape elements in the roundabout leg medians or for the regional trail. 16 This task was partially completed on 3/11/15 with SEH, TRPD and City staff. • 17 Task will notify CenterPoint Energy, Xcel Energy, Comcast, and CenturyLink of the potential project and inquire whether or not they have any facilities in need of updating. If so, the private utility companies will be instructed to coordinate with the City the timing of this work prior to the start of the project. Page 4 of 5 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT COST SUMMARY Bid Document Services Subtotal Hours 1,857 Subtotal Labor Cost $223,179.61 Subtotal SEH Expenses $1,500.39 Subtotal Subconsultant Expenses $12,615.00 Subtotal $237,295.00 TOTAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPOSAL: $237,295.00 P:\AE \E\ Edina\ 131821\ 1 - genl \10 - setup - cont \03 - proposal \[SEH THB Tracy Valley RAB Bid Docs Council.xlsx]Hours -Costs NOTES 1 Task completed by City and provided to SEH 2 Counts will occur during May with school still in session 3 A majority of the project area has already been surveyed in conjunction with the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail (NMCRT) project. We will only collect topographic survey where necessary to supplement this data. Includes topographic survey of existing culverts under Tracy Avenue and Valley Lane and upstream creek cross sections. 4 A pipe condition assessment of the Tracy Avenue culvert will not be completed due to the presence of existing standing water inside the culvert. In order to obtain a thorough analysis of the culvert, either a temporary cofferdam, diver, or subconsultant who specializes in robotic video in under -water conditions would be required. Due to budget constraints, we have not included this scope of work in our work plan. 5 SEH will contract directly with Braun Intertec for soil borings and laboratory testing. 6 We will use the December 2014 preliminary roundabout concept we developed with staff as the basis for our final roundabout design. 7 Horizontal and vertical alignments will be assigned to all streets in the project area. 8 Design shall adhere to MnDOT State Aid design standards. 9 Complete the detailed design of storm sewer extensions and /or new systems per State Aid hydraulic design standards 10 Basin design for treatment purposes should not be needed based on the decrease of impervious area created by the project. Given the elevation drop to the creek, we anticipate the design of a basin to provide energy dissipation. 11 Based on discussions with staff, we understand all water main in the project area will be replaced. This includes design of directional drilled water main under Nine Mile Creek at Valley Lane. This includes replacement of the main /hydrant located on the New City Convenant Church property. This task assumes the water main pipe and hydrant are located in an existing utility easement. No easement tasks are included in this scope of work including but not limited to graphics, survey, legal descriptions, appraisals, etc. 12 Does not include final design /bid document production of a pedestrian bridge since the box culvert at Valley Lane will be extended. 13 The existing culvert under Tracy Avenue will be left in place. Our scope of work does not include design /bid document production for the rehabilitation (lining) or reconstruction (dig and replace) of this culvert. 14 Based on discussions City staff have conducted with Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, our scope of work for the replacement of this culvert assumes replacement in kind that matches the existing width and height of the culvert, no custom precast concrete wingwall will be required on the upstream side of the culvert and a standard MnDOT end section will be installed on the downstream side. 15 Assumes landscaping plan is limited to only the center median of the roundabout. Does not include additional landscape elements in the roundabout leg medians or for the regional trail. 16 This task was partially completed on 3/11/15 with SEH, TRPD and City staff. • 17 Task will notify CenterPoint Energy, Xcel Energy, Comcast, and CenturyLink of the potential project and inquire whether or not they have any facilities in need of updating. If so, the private utility companies will be instructed to coordinate with the City the timing of this work prior to the start of the project. Page 4 of 5 • 18 One (1) meeting will be scheduled to present a 60% design review with the public. City staff will determine meeting invitees and send invites. 19 SEH will provide one (1) plot at a scale of 1 " =30'. The plot will have an aerial photo of the project area with 1. existing geometric line work 2. existing water main trunk pipe line work 3. topographic survey line work 4. property and right -of -way lines 5. street names and addresses, and 6. 60% complete proposed improvements for the roundabout, regional trail, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm sewer, and water main. 20 Assumes attendance by SEH staff is not required and City staff will create the meeting presentation. 21 Obtain specific permitting parameters from Nine Mile Creek Watershed District staff regarding storm water treatment, water quality, floodplain, and wetlands as applicable. 22 Contains title sheet, certification sheet, table of contents, contact sheet, instructions to bidders, and advertisement for bids. 23 Includes proposal form, instructions to bidders, and advertisement for bids 24 Quantity calculations will be captured in a XLSX file that will be incorporated into the proposal form as part of the bidding document project manual and monthly pay applications utilized during reconstruction to track quantities and costs for each funding source allocated for the project. 25 Includes email submittal in pdf format of draft final bidding documents 26 Review of project area only 27 We will use the Edina High School HEC -RAS model from NMCRT project as starting point and extend the model downstream to FEMA FIS Section BK (approx. 250 feet downstream of Valley View Rd). The flow data and cross sections are expected to come from NMCWD XPSWMM model, with cut cross sections at FEMA FIS cross section locations added for further detail. The HEC -RAS model will be compared to the NMCWD XPSWMM model for accuracy. Topographic data is anticipated to come from LiDAR, project surface and survey. Data representing existing culverts will come from survey. 28 End product will result in a NO RISE condition or change in water surface profiles due to proposed improvements that meets NMCWD rules. Includes analysis of extending the box culvert at Valley Lane in lieu of proposing a pedestrian bridge. 29 Incorporate culvert design as applicable. 30 Includes 3rd party review of limited hydraulic models and cross checking in XPSWMM (assume this is throughout design process, not just one review) 31 Includes the entire project area, not just the crossings 32 Bid documents will be available for purchase via Quest CDN on the City's web site. Page 5 of 5 To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL From: Chad A. Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Date: May 19, 2015 A, o Fe� 11 • ,�c�R es CEO • Agenda Item #: IV. E. The Recommended Bid is ❑X Within Budget ❑ Not Within Budget Subject: Authorize Watermain Cleaning Services for the Morningside Neighborhood Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: April 14, 2015 Company: Exotec Canada, Inc. Northwest Asphalt, Inc. Northdale Construction Company, Inc. Recommended Quote or Bid: Exotec Canada, Inc. General Information: Bid or Expiration Date: June 14, 2015 Amount of Quote or Bid: $98,950.00 NA NA $98,950.00 The Morningside area of Edina is one of the older neighborhoods in Edina dating back to the 1930's. The water system within Morningside is constructed mainly of unlined cast iron pipes. These unlined pipes allow iron to oxidize from the pipe wall. The iron material is the source of red -water complaints but also the iron combines with water to form ferric hydroxide. The ferric hydroxide is quite voluminous and forms deposits in the water main. These deposits greatly inhibit the ability of the watermains to pass high volume flows as required for firefighting efforts. The loss of flow capacity is a public safety issue. Several options exist for the rehabilitation of unlined cast iron watermains. These includes: 1) complete replacement using open cut techniques, 2) replacement using pipe bursting methods, 3) pipe lining using cast in place pipe; 4) relining with cement mortar materials. Recently, we have been introduced to a trenchless cleaning method that is able to remove the watermain deposits and coat the interior of the pipelines to slow the release of iron from the pipe wall. This effort will improve the conveyance capacity of the mains and reduce red -water complaints until the project area reaches its anticipated year of reconstruction. Based on current analysis of citywide pavement condition and utility considerations, the Morningside D neighborhood, within which the water mains of concern are located, is planned for reconstruction in 2019. At that time, the main will be rehabilitated either through a cement lining process or bursting the existing mains with high - density polyethylene pipe. This work requires the removal of the internal parts of the fire hydrants. Public Works is performing fire hydrant maintenance this year. This project creates an opportunity for them to review the internal parts and i it affords the City an opportunity to create efficiencies between projects. City of Edina , 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER Page 2 is This project, utilizing a different rehabilitation method, is listed in the CIP as Project No. 15 -161 in the amounts of $450,000 and $275,000 for years 2015 and 2016, respectively. Based on those budget numbers, this project will save the City approximately $600,000 for those budget years. This project will be funded from the water utility fund. Staff recommends awarding the Morningside Watermain Cleaning to Exotec Canada, Inc. • G:\PVV\CENTRALSVCSIENG DIVIPROJECTSICONTRACTS \20151ENG I S -IONB WM Cleaning \WM556 M'side WM LininglAdminftsc\Item IV. E. Award of Quote.docx City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. - Edina, MN 55424 • To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Chad A. Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Date: May 19, 2015 iHnR Agenda Item #: IV. F. Action 0 Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Subject: Authorize Public Improvements and Special Assessment Agreements Action Requested: Authorize Mayor and City Manager to approve attached Public Improvement and Special Assessment Agreements for sanitary sewer and water services for the 2015 Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction areas. Information / Background: Some property owners in the 2015 Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction areas upgraded their service lines and requested that the extra cost be added to their special assessment. The attached signed agreements allow staff to add the cost immediately as pending assessments. Attachments: Public Improvement and Special Assessment Agreements G: \PMCENTRAL SVCS \ENG DI1APR0JECTS\C0NTRACTS\2015 \ENG 15 -3 Arden Park D_54th St \BA412 Arden Park\ADMIN \LEGAL \Sewer Upgrades \Item IV. F. Approve Spec Assess Agree.docx City of Edina - 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this G day of yAO' , 20 ►S, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Ronald Pobiel and Mona Pobiel, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 057, Block, Subdivision Auditor's Subdivision No. 172, having a street address of 5109 Halifax Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE • AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2683 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2683 for the amount of $2,295.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $2,295.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 , Fax 952 -826 -0392 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF e (SS. by PROPERTY OWNER: onald Pobiel Mona Pobie The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _� day of 0 CITY OF EDINA • AND STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager 20 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn 40 NOTARY PUBLIC • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT • AGREEMENT made this 64-day of No, tA , 201_T_, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and H J Loeffler and Katherine J Loeffler, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 060, Block , Auditor's Subdivision No. 172 . having a street address of 5125 Halifax Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Hiqhview Plumbing, Inc. 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka MN 55345 (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2693 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2693 for the amount of $6,090.0 0. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $6,090.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 PROP Ha STATE OF MINNESOTA ) • 4� (SS. COUNTY i t The in �w`a� by SHARON M. ALLISON Notts►PubNa*U W4ft yrcenrrr..NnE,�w.arn at• �p rine J i me this G4- day of ',2015 BLIC CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA (SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC 0 • • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this / day o OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS f �VU 20 N, by and between the CITY ( "City ") Jnd Kirk A Mathison and Nancy K Mathison, A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 003, Block 001, Subdivision Clagramar Third Addition, having a street address of 5908 Arbour Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15- 4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Beniamin Franklin, 1424 3rd Street North, Minneapolis, MN 55411, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2687 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2687 for the amount of $8,700.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $8,700.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 . Fax 952- 826 -0392 STATE OF MIN ESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF 2 0— The foregoing instrument 20�S by C SHARON M. ALLISON Notary PubboalAinnes0 Mr cenw,rwa� 3/, STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) PROPERTY OWNER: irk A Mathison Nancy K Wathison iow d$ before me N SA- day of a i �. —tUu V� NO A UBLIC CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20 , by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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 DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 • RNK:srn PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of MaoA 20, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Chijifopher Willmuth and Adriane Willmuth, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 005, Block 002, Subdivision Glenview Addition To Edina, having a street address of 5116 Halifax Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: • 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer & Water, 3233 45th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2680 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2680 for the amount of $2,470.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. • 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $2,470.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov.952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (SS. COUNTY O The foregoing instrument by 0 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) PROPERTY OWN Christopher Willmuth Adria a Willmuth day of 20/5, NOTARY �013LIC / v NANCY J. KMKHOFF NOTARY PUSUC. MINNESOTA My Cartun"on E*= Jan. SL 1020 CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this � day of 20L5 by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and F151eir Brosius and Rosanna Staffa, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 004, Block 001 Subdivision South Harriet Park Steiner Addition, having a street address of 5205 Minnehaha Boulevard, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their water service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: • 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Hiqhview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2689 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2689 for the amount of $4,300.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. J 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $4,300.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • STATE OF MINNESOTA ( SS. COUNTY OF PROPERTY NER- Peter B osiu i Rosa a Std The foregoing instru nent was acknowledged befw me this L day of .2015. by ate - $rD!;' L&S !Zi- 5ct-L,A --, c-- J{ i Fey- ja. ARY LIC Scdnv�a,� 3�t2- °fig Jennifer Johnsen Notary Public, State of Minnesota My Commission Expires + ' January 31,-2018 18 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) BY: CITY OF EDINA 91 James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 120 by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 0 day of � c � 20 15, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and David R Edstam and Tina S Edstam, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 012, Block 002, Subdivision Brucewood, having a street address of 5023 Bruce Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE • AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345 (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2672 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2672 for the amount of 6,390.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. is 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $6,390.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 PROPERTY OWNER: David R Edstam Tina S Edstam STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 3d day of r by V : fi a4 1. &4 em r-/f7 4 ' 44 NO ARY PUBLIC LfNETTE BIUNNO NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA My Corp., ion Expires Jan. 31, 2016 CITY OF EDINA BY: • James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA } ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:sm • NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of OM (s , 20_(5, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City'') and Joseph Jellen and Rosemary Jellen, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 037, Block 002, Subdivision South Harriet Park, 2 "d Addition, having a street address of 5221 Minnehaha Blvd, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). Q The City has raqU a3t. ed that Property O .Lfn e' replace t he eLivlist.iin ig solver sa r•IVG line's) from Vm }ll i + > ran�R sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their water service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE • AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Ouverson Sewer & Water, Inc., P.O. Box 247, Loretto, MN 55357, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2665 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2665 for the amount of $2,900.0 0. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. • 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $2,900.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the N ENIG ' ding but not limited to hearing requirements and any F'U IiC rr :provelrlei�t and t0 City Project i ii. �.s ii YCiu i i u not iY iitc claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard - Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov - 952 - 826 -0371 - Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) iI ( SS. COUNTY OF _ The foregoing instru ent was acknowledged before me this by Jo le r) ei � I-L j P I n NOTARY PUBLIC TAMARA ANN TRCKA NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 0113120 CITY OF EDINA MR B� STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ,-�`1 +h day of 4 r,' I 20 I James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager • The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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 DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 • RNK:srn PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 104- day of , 20 r> , by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Ci y") and Joseph D Gensch and Lori J Hanson, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 9, Block 002, Subdivision Benton Park, having a street address of 5120 West 60th Street, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 14- 4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. • NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Benjamin Franklin Plumbing, 1424 No. 3rd St., Minneapolis, MN 55411 (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No.2686 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2686 for the amount of $10,250.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $10,250.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 14 -4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 14 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. • ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • is PROPERTY OWNER: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was c 2011 , by 4 NOT before CITY OF EDINA AND STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Yft day of Public, State of Minnesota Commission Expires January 31, 20$0 James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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 DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 • Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this < day of 20/57, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and John C Huseby and Nancy K Huseby, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 002, Block 001, Subdivision Clagramar Third Addition, having a street address of 5904 Arbour Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has is requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Benjamin Franklin, 1424 3'd Street North, Minneapolis, MN 55411, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2684 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2684 for the amount of 10100.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $10,100.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. 0 • • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) // (ss. COUNTY OF 1?ev ple? l ) he foregoing instrument was acknowle ged before e this /' day of �-,��, t ,20/ 5- , by 'otinud�,� -Q�� STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) NOT PtJ LIC CITY OF EDINA AND James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. Neal, respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center •1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC 2 V iNNES0 i� ale', h1�r�j5lJ "1 (PiAE�G1,'$ii1$ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) NOT PtJ LIC CITY OF EDINA AND James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center •1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC 2 9 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day ofi /G 20 by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Matthew J Youngstrom and Amy P Youngstrom, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). O'r RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 003, Block 002, Subdivision James A. Roberts Estate, having a street address of 5108 West 62nd Street, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 14-4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer & Water, 3233 45`h Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2668 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2668 for the amount of $7,850.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $7,850.0 0 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 14-4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 14 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952 -826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • PROPERTY OWNER- itc M�atthe Wj ou st Amy Youngstr STATE OF MINNESOTA ( ss. COUNTY OF�,�/ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowle before by -___ � r.-a � 1-,,,,- IK. T —s-� M OL Mev"c JAMES MICHAEL BA CH- NOTARY NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2019 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 41 day of CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager 20�' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_ by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUFTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNKsrn NOTARY PUBLIC • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this `day of r �_A 20 !�, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") anA Freeborn R Oldfield, a single person, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 39, Block 001, Subdivision South Harriet Park, 2"d Addition, raving a street address of 5200 Gc�rgas Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Benjamin Franklin Plumbing, 1424 North 3rd Street, Minneapolis, MN 55411, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2675 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2675 for the amount of $2,421.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $2,421.00 against the Sub;ect Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same e ter i its as City Protect No. ENG 15-3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 PROPERTY OWNER: • Freeborn R Oldfield STATE OF MINNESOTA ' COUNTY OF t �)) (ss. Th fore oing instrum t wa a uVledg d -Wore me this o��- day of rj , 20, by r SHARON M. ALLISON Notary Pubf;c-Minnesota M1lWtitrwo"n Exgna Jan 31, 9020 • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) BLIC CITY OF EDINA AND James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_ by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curare Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this — . day of 4 � �q , 20 c ; by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Richard Parry and Mallette Parry, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 001, Block 001, Subdivision Scenic View Second Auultii3l�, having street address Of 5�1� ::may Drive, Edina, iviinne�vL (tile "Stibi L i � Wt:;i�y "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15- 4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. 0 NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: • 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Roto- Rooter Plumbing & Drain Service, 14530 27th Ave. No., Minneapolis, MN 55447, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2678 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2678 for the amount of $11,100.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $11,100.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15-4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard - Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov - 952- 826 -0371 - Fax 952 - 826 -0392 PROPERTY OWNER: - Richard Parry I Mallette Parry STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF AL.. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this .GG day of 20��by .�c �eYr I a ie CHRISTOPHER WAYNE STAATS (( ry NO Y b NOTARY PUBLIC- MINNESOTA PUBLIC I t to y' MY COMMISSION EV IRES p31r418 CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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 DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of 64 , 20 [�, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and gusan C Smith, a single person, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 008, Block 003, Subdivision Clover Lane Addition 3rd Unit, having a street address of 6116 Tingdale Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 14 -4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: • 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Benjamin Franklin Plumbing, 1424 3rd Street No., Minneapolis, MN 55411, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2682 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2682 for the amount of $9,980.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $9,980.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 14 -4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 14 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaNIN.gov - 952 - 826 -0371 - Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • PROPERTY OWNER: C� Susan C Smith STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF �� ) by • The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2-4- day of Q J7 r t i 20 /S, �.s• -4.,� KATHLEEN A STUNDAHI. N NOTARY PUBLIC OTARY PUBLIC MINNESOTA •u*• my fDo M68IN Bon JR St, 2020 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) CITY OF EDINA M. AND James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn C NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of t\ \) V � \ 20 t ? by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Jill C Rocheleau and Nick J Dzandzara, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 003, Block 002, Subdivision South Harriet Park, 2nd Addition, having a street address of 5208 Halifax Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer & Water, 3233 45th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2670 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2670 for the amount of $2,500.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $2,500.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaNIN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • PROPERTY OW ER: Jill Rocheleau —/IJ Nick J D an" a STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (SS. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 17'' — day of - 20 15; by T' II C. r2�c�ti /ccv c•wl ���� �iza.rolzc -� NOTARY PUBLIC .. CHRISTOPHERWA`MS STNS ` A NOTARY PUBLIC MINNESOTA " a �(p►pESo1131i2 g +' MryM CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of 20J by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Jeffrey Harmening and Lisa C Harmening, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot, Block 001, Subdivision South Harriet Park, 2nd Addition, having a street address of 5229 Halifax Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Benjamin Franklin Plumbing, 1424 North 3`d Street, Minneapolis, MN 55411, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2674 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2674 for the amount of 6120.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $6,120.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • PROPERTY OWNER: Je a e ' g Lisa C Harmening STATE OF MINNESOTA • (SS. COUNTY O vim) b � ---The foregoing str ent w acklnwl�cjged before me this ??- day of rj 20�, y c.,. �--''jj ��l l } SHARON M. ALLISON MftrY Pub"nnesois C0"**W*" milk" ran 31.2020 • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) NOTAR7 PUBLIC CITY OF EDINA AND James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_ by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 16 day of April 20_j_5 by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Nancy D. Carlson, a single person, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 036, Block 002, Subdivision South Harriet Park, 2nd Addition, having a street address of 5225 Minnehaha Blvd, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their water service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE • AS FOLLOWS: • 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Ouverson Sewer & Water, Inc., P.O. Box 247, Loretto, MN 55357, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2664 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2664 for the amount of 3,250.0 . The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $3,250.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaNiN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF Nu The foregoing, instru by ,n +s) PROPERTY OWNER: Nancy D. Ca Ison ( SS. } was acknowledged before Te this C 0 day of I , 2015-, f JOH AN ARKEMA r' NOTARY PUBLIC- MINNESOTA My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2019 je CITY OF EDINA AND STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ' 20 by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:sm • NOTARY PUBLIC 0 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this A day of / , 201J-, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a. Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Daniel J Steinhagen and Amy J Steinhagen, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 008, Block 002, Subdivision Clover Lane Addition 3rd Unit, having a street address of 5020 Valley View Road, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B.. . The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 14- 4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has Ie requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 0 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345 (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No.2669 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2669 for the amount of $8,490.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $8,490.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 14-4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 14-4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov.952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 r� u PROPERTY OWNER: Daniel J S einhagen Amy J Steinhagen STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF 99,itMirJ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 14fh day of 201 , by tAo%et Is AM STc(a1�+4cPnn JAUMkt�T N T PUBLIC NWANY vuaus • NOMISOTA Mr COMMOSIM MMMES Aft 71, 260 CITY OF EDINA Mm AND STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (Ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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 DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNKsm PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this I day of ".� , 20 iY, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and James C Tyson and Jan D Tyson, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 001, Block 004, Subdivision Brucewood, having a street address of 5101 Arden Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE 18 AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer & Water, 3233 45th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2660 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2660 for the amount of $6,400.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $6,400.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 PROPERTY OWNS Jams C Tyson Jan D Tyson ca-ilu'71 TAMMY ENG LAND STATE OF MINNESOTA NOTARY PUBLIC• MINNESOTA ( SS. MY Commission Expires Jan, 31, 2019 COUNTY OF ��'�- +���-�� ) The foregoing instApent was by r,� Ctn7eS STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) re me this day off 201 NOT CITY OF EDINA `►e James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_ by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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 DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 0 RNK:srn 0 :j -/c PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this ti day of fl/.,%r ! 20 ISM, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and John T Meenan and Christine M Meenan, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 012, Block 002, Subdivision South Harriet Park, 2nd Addition, having a street address of 5300 Halifax Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer & Water, 3233 45th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2659 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2659 for the amount of $5,980.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $5,980-00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • 0 PROPERTY OWNER: h T Meenan v Christine M Meenan STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this �' day of 2015 by -To -T-. --,-,t p4. '�," 0 1 /3'/7O/7 NOTARY PUBLIC 0 �"' , CHRISTOPHER WAYNE STARTS -r NOTARY PUBUC • MINNESOTA �� ! W WMMISSION WM0113VM CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC 0 • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT cal AGREEMENT made this 23 day of 20 A7 , by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Daniel A Peterson and Jodie L Korinek, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 007, Block 003, Subdivision Clover Lane Addition 3rd Unit, having a street address of 6112 Tingdale Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 14 -4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Hiqhview Plumbing, Inc. 4301 Hiqhview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2651 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2651 for the amount of $8,795.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $8,795.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 14 -4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 14 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 r� L.._J 7!,PERT ER: Daniel A Peterson y J ie L Korinek STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (SS. COUNTY OF )-I i '41V C P" ) The foregoing instrum nt was acknowbNCBLI a th by +w CHAD 6 ANVARY Notary Public CITY OF EDINA state of Minnesota My Commission Expires January 37 , 2018 BY: GLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) is day of ►� , 201_�7 n AeA4- James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:sm NOTARY PUBLIC • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 2, 3 day of /41 c,,r 20L-5, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Mary E. Balogh, a single person, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 002, Block 002, Subdivision South Harriet Park, 2nd Addition, having a street address of 5204 Halifax Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer & Water, 3233 45" Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406 (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2652 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2652 for the amount of $5,980.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $5,980.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952- 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 PROPERTY OWNE 4 lc Mary E. logh STATE OF MINNESOTA ) // //�� (SS. COUNTY OF /�l1✓ 1� 7 ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of Rd rCA, 20 /S by /�1�L 0 lG�i TAMRA LEA ADAMS NOTARY PUBLIC iL Notary Public- Minnesota _; My Commission @xpires Janes yyyy/W V/+/'rMMnNN^ CITY OF EDINA BY: • James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H, Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of &L11 Z--- , 20 Z--by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Stephen H Sando and Mary E Sando, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner ") RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 012, Block 003, Subdivision Glenview Addition to Edina, raving a street address of 5J33 Juanita Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE 0 AS FOLLOWS: • 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer & Water, 3233 45th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2655 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2655 for the amount of $6,250.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $6,250.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • PROPERTY OWNER: Step en H San-do Mary E Sa o STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument w ck owled ed b fore m this 3 day of f lP' `/ , 20� E by Q �pq v JESSE ELSENpETER NOTARY PUBLIC MINNESOTA My CW0js*n E;#es Jan. 31,2019 NOTA PUB CITY OF EDINA BY: • James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. Neal, respectively the Miayor 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 3k&�- day of M d r � , 201, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and bonald W Wenger and Carolyn A Wenger, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 004, Block 002, Subdivision South Harriet Park, 2 I Addition, having a street address of 5212 Halifax Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE • AS FOLLOWS: 0 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer & Water, 3233 45th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406, (the "Contractor') to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2657 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2657 for the amount of $5,950.0 0. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $5,950.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • 0 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF 2. r-') The foreg Ing instr ment was by a PROPERTY OWNER: Donald W en §er O (/ vy Carolyn A W nger ed NOT SHARON M. AWISON Notary pw*o.MUxeaft ' Mp Cannrwen ExpNy Jan fit, 2020 me this R day of 20 BLIC CITY OF EDINA AND STATE OF MINNESOTA James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 97' (day of 20-4��,by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City") and Lawrence L Swandby, a single person, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 007, Block 004, Subdivision Glenview Addition to Edina, having a street address of 5124 Juanita Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: • 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345 (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2654 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2654 for the amount of $5,580.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of 5 580.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952- 826 -0392 • • • PR 77&' RTY OWNE 7 ,e ^' � rence L a y- -- STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF ) by �he foregoing instrument w s acknowl dged before me this day of � �V `tv. (� J i.�;�vt & NOTARY PURL NATHAN FRITZ NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA won Egkes Jan. 31, 2019 CITY OF EDINA BY: AND STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager 201> The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scoff H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452-5000 RNK:sm NOTARY PUBLIC • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT • AGREEMENT made this day of `` 20 ! by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Michael K Sjoblom and Geraldine A Sjoblom, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 007, Block 002, Subdivision Clover Lane Addition 3'd Unit, having a street address of 5016 Valley View Road, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 14 -4. C. Property Owner has replaced their water service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc. 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2656 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2656 for the amount of 060:96: The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 3���•p° R;vz• O Z) 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of 2-against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 14-4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 14 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OFl/Ann�p— Qj^ by PROPERTIYOW�NER: Michael K Sjoblo h Geraldine A Sjoblom �X ( ss. NOTARY PUBLIC PAUL L BOND NOTARY PUBLIC • MIN TA MY COMMISSION EXPIR66A11 11 02Q CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) rlle!" � , 20L'' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC • \ cORPOM -V PUBLIC I OVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of NQ r41-N , 20 IC--,, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and James R. Allen and Elaine W. Allen, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 004, Block 003, Subdivision Edina Highlands Lakeside Addition, having a street address of 5708 Wycliffe Road, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15- 4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has • requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Benjamin Franklin, 1424 3rd Street North, Minneapolis, MN 55411, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2650 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2650 for the amount of $11,022,50. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $11,022.50 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15-4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the 40 title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard - Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov - 952- 826 -0371 - Fax 952- 826 -0392 • PROPERTY OWNER: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF 4eAkAQA1 The foregoing instrument (d (k ( , 20 1 Z--,, by J7-,, -ZA11en ne W. Allen lowl,ed before me this`" day of SlIU.ALLIWM NOTARY PUBLIC 001% 403t. • CITY OF EDINA 0 :yj _►1 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20 , by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of .- � 20_6 by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and ayne A Lindholm and Maureen M Lindholm, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 009, Block 002, Subdivision Clover Lane Addition 3`d Unit, having a street address of 5024 Valley View Road, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property"). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 14 -4. C. Property Owner has replaced their water service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: . 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc. 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2666 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2666 for the amount of $3,895.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $3,895.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 14-4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 14 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952 - 826 -0371 . Fax 952 -826 -0392 PRO ER: Wayne A Lindholm aureen M Lin ho STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF }fey n-e,P " ) k f day of 1�j4�'i 20 CITY OF EDINA BY: • James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELLKNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1360 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:sm • NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of 4/1j , 20 IS, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Dennis F Maetzold and Linda Maetzold, husband an( wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 004, Block 001, Subdivision Brucewood, having a stree address of 5110 Arden Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunl sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested tha the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Minneapolis & Suburban Sewer 8 Water, 3233 451h Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55406, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement, 40 Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2661 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2661 for the amount of $6,925.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $6,925.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. • ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) �( , (ss. COUNTY OF k�W 01( ) by 14U IMMY MMIL; 14 Commission EqY' jir s Jan. 31, 017 � ,y, 41[14 i•1� PROPERTY OWNER: Lu�s -YV "r - , M ate j az Dennis F Maetzold 41'-� moj�a Linda Maetzold this iP daday of l 74 �^ L , 20 1S, CITY OF EDINA M AND James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:sm • NOTARY PUBLIC LIB MWROVEMEW SPECK L -RED - _ REED -E ii° � 1h d N ' - -= ;� mod, 1 �n �I'�'Y F oo am Ohe 'PT av Owre■ p, WIMA .■ .. 9�. ^. l t -T -` i .p ��� n w: eiq-.I - ■ , e i la .yy i+ @ . BI 1 be Cfty f m rmmiesied fta 'Rmpwy Omw rte the �aml _ sr so ! % 5). ff Om ft- try * qr 1 1:1? r ht f- ri The :mo t � ?!y � I�r�N� Ir ct��t�� l'� �� � c�rii rapi ng willow ` Sesioa f Irom ki=d stop Wx in "und NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MEAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS6 ■ - ■. �. VMS at I-a.i�� �4 i ■.. �_ t.. .�,� cy: i ti -:' .. ,J:�',n. u, .d_ °a. ■.i3. "r ' 's. aetp �'q.'.. ,F...., i. ( L■ e41 p m s�;-. � !� '' Was° � .:' ..fi 'r. 7 y. _.. ■ :. -�'R _; : ■: ■- k -R' .d $ } ;:., _. I: ., `„ ., , ;•c. . ?,p i<s' '� .. m :. . al .Ia�:b� �il..�:.i`d., � ;. .■�� .ei ,.. - - :�� �,. ails. 'b: .,. :,•. �." ■.' ,n- • �c �.,: r. ,� :t a �* ■. � � - I. $ '" � 1�: it 11 - t', . 7 ! - a ■ ^-. ,(-_ Y�'�'.� + ^i+'4:.671 Tih, .' be &Om O e0d OmXWS &:moanm aM - . T Tf AWovnent fey be! 1 Ift to ft SLOW Propeffty- • ! J: Al LIB MWROVEMEW SPECK L -RED - _ REED -E ii° � 1h d N ' - -= ;� mod, 1 �n �I'�'Y F oo am Ohe 'PT av Owre■ p, WIMA .■ .. 9�. ^. l t -T -` i .p ��� n w: eiq-.I - ■ , e i la .yy i+ @ . BI 1 be Cfty f m rmmiesied fta 'Rmpwy Omw rte the �aml _ sr so ! % 5). ff Om ft- try * qr 1 1:1? r ht f- ri The :mo t � ?!y � I�r�N� Ir ct��t�� l'� �� � c�rii rapi ng willow ` Sesioa f Irom ki=d stop Wx in "und NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MEAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS6 ■ - ■. �. VMS at I-a.i�� �4 i ■.. �_ t.. .�,� cy: i ti -:' .. ,J:�',n. u, .d_ °a. ■.i3. "r ' 's. aetp �'q.'.. ,F...., i. ( L■ e41 p m s�;-. � !� '' Was° � .:' ..fi 'r. 7 y. _.. ■ :. -�'R _; : ■: ■- k -R' .d $ } ;:., _. I: ., `„ ., , ;•c. . ?,p i<s' '� .. m :. . al .Ia�:b� �il..�:.i`d., � ;. .■�� .ei ,.. - - :�� �,. ails. 'b: .,. :,•. �." ■.' ,n- • �c �.,: r. ,� :t a �* ■. � � - I. $ '" � 1�: it 11 - t', . 7 ! - a ■ ^-. ,(-_ Y�'�'.� + ^i+'4:.671 Tih, .' be &Om O e0d OmXWS &:moanm aM - . T Tf AWovnent fey be! 1 Ift to ft SLOW Propeffty- • ! J: • n S@IIIIIE PNNNE CIA Or-, I . Lli- FATE OF &MNNE TA ' qs4P'kRJTq oire wi, days L�[qy� NOTARYPUWC 1- l ,- ! �: T T ttoe Y -N: = ",d" . ' ■:'1.1.4. 4- .'.4:-!: d.. of the aryDf MITWSOM •! F 6Q..; ,. 1.4., l.:n bewaf f: "S. lH M.. j dr.. 4.. ! fi 'e wff"ft WVlgad by jits C4,, CAM-PMLL FAT" 13M cgmamio CdffJw cw" !yOKhmw PUBW NOTARY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this _ C� day of A,n�, ` EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Craig Strauss and Leigh Strauss, husband and wife, CITY OF "Property Owner "). he RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 003, Block 001, Subdivision Brucewood having a street address of 5112 Arden Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: • 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote Water. 3233 45`h Avenue South Minnea olis MN 55406 (the "Contractor ") to construct Minneapolis Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2662 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2662 for the amount of 6 775.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of J6 5.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives an app eal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. y 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. • ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.F,dinaN1N.gov.952 -826 -037] . Fax 952 -826 -0392 PROPERTY OWNE Craig Strauss Leigh Strauss STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF 11 1 n (SS' by The foregoing instrument w cknpwle�jed 4e%re '-777- r,�^' " " =,Y t}kwN M M R NOTARY PUBLIC Notary Public State o► Minnesota = My Commission Expires January 31, 201 d CITY OF EDINA M • AND STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN (SS. q day of 20 J� James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. Neal, respectively the Mayor and City anager of the City of Edina a20 Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its Cit Council. Y DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Pfotessional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452-5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 44,_ day of A xq , 20 t'7, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Michael Madich and Karen Madich, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner ") RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 016, Block 001, Subdivision Hyde Park, having a street address of 7428 Hyde Park Drive, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -5. C. Property Owner has replaced their water service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 41 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2681 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2681 for the amount of $4,330.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $4,330.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -5. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -5, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT • 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 -826 -0392 PROP O N Michael Madich Kar n Madich STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( SS. COUNTY OF 14PnnPPiA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this *`11 day of 11'11Z& (4 20 by Hichaet 1- -a1,en "6iC(j' Lj LAURA B. DEBOER NOTARY PUBLIC 1EMY1C4ffWiui0n TARY PUBIC - MMNrI =A Expim JAN. 31, • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (Ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) CITY OF EDINA BY: AND James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC C] PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this ` day of 2P-/r,-by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (City) and James J Hinfker III and Betsy Jo Hmiker, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 008, Block 003, Subdivision Brucewood having a street address of 5015 Arden Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inca 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka MN 55345, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2677 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2677 for the amount of $6,690.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $6,690.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. to ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952- 826 -0392 4PRR N OWNE R: Hint r III Betsy J ike STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF Ski ( ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ��� 20 by gm � Kv, W-u -ice aw9 ,- �-�,.. t LL -W RANAE B. MARTINSON Notary Public4AInrmota Wy C0nvnkmW Expitea,an 91, 2020 • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN NOTARY PUBLIC CITY OF EDINA BY. James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20 i by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Prolessional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:sm NOTARY PUBLIC �RA"B. INS UN Notary nesda Jan 31, 2D20 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT r� AGREEMENT made this Q? day of �� 20 IS, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and James M Luther and Margaret J Luther, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 006, Block 002, Subdivision Scenic View First Addition, having a street address of 6072 O!int4r Circle, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property"). J g 's °" B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 14 -4. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE • AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc. 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2676 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2676 for the amount of $7,190.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. • 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $7,190.00 against the Sub ;ect Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 14 -4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 14-4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 P P RTY OWNER: FAI. C&ti 40 Omes M Luther Margar J Lut r STATE OF MINNESOTA (Ss. COUNTY OF The f( regoing in trument wa a wledg d before me thiq day of FA , L 201 by -- M A}- IU NOTARY PUBLIC HU.DA ALICELE KAYAD Notary Public Minnesota '� •' MY commission Expires 1/31/2017 CITY OF EDINA M.J•'J1� ?Tray"' I BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott H. Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (Ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_ by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC i PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of I 20/ by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and N ncy E Tarbox, a single person, (the "Properly Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 008, Block 004, Subdivision Glenview Addition to Edina, having a street address of 5128 Juanita Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement °) and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 iHighview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345 (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2663 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2663 for the amount of $5,590.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. i 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $5,590.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952- 826 -0392 PROPERTY OWNER: LfNETTE BIUNNO G NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA C; My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2016 Nancy E Xarbox STATE OF MINNESOTA ( ss. COUNTY OF I A ) The foregoing instrument w s acknowled of re a this U day of Y`� r! , 20 by N TARY PUBLIC • CITY OF EDINA CA AND STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC • PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this Gkday of 20 by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and T;o1nas Guzik and Sheila Guzik, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 014, Block 003, Subdivision Glenview Addition to Edina, having a street address of 5125 Juanita Avenue, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15 -3. C. Property Owner has replaced their sanitary sewer and water service lines and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. isNOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2679 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2679 for the amount of $6,090.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $6,090.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -3. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -3, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard - Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov - 952 - 826 -0371 - Fax 952- 826 -0392 • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF a Tte foreaoinu, nstrumenW MI /tW 7h'2L JOSIAH DeFELICE NOTARYPUBLIC - MINNESOTA My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2020 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (Ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) befo? me this day of r Ar 20 15�, ARY PUBLIC CITY OF EDINA BY: AND James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_, by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn • NOTARY PUBLIC • PUBLIC IMPPOVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this / day of 20 �? by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and Paid H Althoff and Barbara Althoff Ruedy, husband and wife, (the "Property Owner "). RECITALS A. Property Owner is the owner of Lot 004, Block 001, Subdivision Scenic View First Addition, having a street address of 6016 Olinger Circle, Edina, Minnesota (the "Subject Property "). B. The City has requested that Property Owner replace the existing sewer service line(s) from the trunk sanitary sewer pipe to the right -of -way line on the Subject Property ( "Public Improvement ") and also consider replacing water service line from the stop box in conjunction with City Project No. ENG 15- 4. C. Property Owner has replaced their water service line and has requested that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a quote from Highview Plumbing, Inc., 4301 Highview Place, Minnetonka, MN 55345, (the "Contractor ") to construct the Public Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to construct the Public Improvement and Purchase Order No. 2691 was issued to the Contractor. The work is completed and the Contractor has submitted an invoice to the City referring to Purchase Order No. 2691 for the amount of $3,495.00. The City is in receipt of a lien waiver for the work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The City will assess the Project Cost in the amount of $3,495.00 against the Subject Property. The Project Cost will be assessed under the same terms as City Project No. ENG 15 -4. The Property Owner waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments and to the Public Improvement and to City Project No. ENG 15 -4, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Subject Property. The Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Property Owner's successors and assigns. This Agreement may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 -826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (Ss. COUNTY OF ; ` ) The foregoing instrument was ackn M A L4 , 2016, by M MARJORIE J BERGMAN NOTARY PUBLIC -MINNESOTA My Cammissbn Expires Jan. 31, 2017 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) PROPERTY OWNER: Paul H Althoff Barbara Althoff Ru d before me this 7 "�' day of NOTAR`i') PUBLI CITY OF EDINA 009 James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott H. Neal, City Manager J The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by James B. Hovland and by Scott H. 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. DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (612) 452 -5000 RNK:srn NOTARY PUBLIC a f. i PUBLIC IMPROVE ►t4ENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of 20 by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ('City") aid Cram S Gorski and Lindsey K Gorski, husband and viife,. (the "Property Owner'). RECITALS A. Property O%vrrer is the owner of Lot W1, Block iNk3, Subtilft!gn Birchcrezt, having a street addrP,sso16100WirchcmtDdv Edina. M nnesom (the "Subject Property " }. B. The City has requested that Ropaity Owner'replace the exis-ting sewer service line(s) from the true sanitary semr pipe to the right -of -my line -on < ft Subject Property (" Pub is Improvement") and also consider replacing water service One from the stops box in conjunction with City Project No. Enka 14.4. C. Property Owner has replaced their S4 r and water §eirvive Tine and fins reg4ie; iod that the City assess the cost of the Public Improvement, against the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. The Owner received a ate from Highyiew Plumbing, Inc. 4301 _ Fflahview Place. Minnetonka, MN 5-5345: (the "Gontractor� to construct ft PuVic Improvement. Property Owner entered into a contract with the Contractor to oonstruct the Public Improvement, and Purchase Cinder No. 2673 was issued to the Contractor.. The wo*1s,. completed and the Contractor has submitted an itwoice to 'the City referring to Purchase ._4rderIND. 2673.4oc he:arnorunit of $ ,�90.0�1, l`I�e City is in receipt of a Ijgn waiver for fate work performed and will pay the Contractor. 2. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. he City will, a=oss the Project Cost in the amount of $9,290.00 against tho Subject Property, The Project Coat will: be assessed under the same terms as City Project Flo. ENG 14-4. The Property Owner waives any and all procodurai and substantive objections to the sgedal ,assessments and to the Public Improvement and t4 City Project No, ENG 144, incluclir-Q but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds tho benefit to the Subject Property. the Property Owner waives any appeal rig hts otherwise available pursuant to Minn: Staff: § 429.481. 3. BINDING EFFECT; RE;Ct3RDWG.: This- Agrearngnt shall be binding upon the Property Owner and the Paoperbf owner's skioxessors arF;J assigns. This Agreement maybe recorded against the title to the Subject Property. ENG[NaRING DEPARTKEN'T 7450 Marra Boulevard + S5439 «e... -e.. 1:,.-1;,ftAA1 v+., s Or.-Y VIA AV?t . C.... o n G.,t. ma? PROPS `Y OWNER. �' i s Craig S Gorski---- IndSey 3i fi0rSki STATE OF (MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF 3 The fox =poi rg inst rroent 4V aCkr+t)wl�clged ibefere me this A�1lf day of _ t "� , 0, . by( - NOT RY PUBLIC • STATE OF MINNESOTA j COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 1 r � I40TARY PU1 LIC MINNESpTA. CITE'' OF EDIMA MyCaambaiN [aplrea. i.31 1 , %a17 ,James S. Hovland, Mayor MN Scott H, Neal, City Manager The foregoing insiirument was acknowledged before me this day of - 2Q_, by ,lames R. Hovland and by Soon H. Neal, respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Edina, a i'Minnesota municipal coMofation, can behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authoNty granted by its City Council. ORAFTFD Eff: CA1 WBELL XNUTSON kyw &`irt rr0l1 317 C40u Oo Ofrke 09nW 1384 CoTarMp C,w for Cu vc Ewan, Minr*#M 55121 Talepbme: (612} 4W-50W f IK.,orn • NOTARY PUBLIC • To: Mayor and City Council From: Joe Abood Braemar Golf Course General Manager Date: May 19, 2015 w91�,1� �A • '1CnRFOLiP1FO • 1888 Agenda Item #: IV. G. The Recommended Bid is © Within Budget ❑ Not Within Budget Subject: Request for Purchase - Braemar Golf Course Electronic Entrance Sign Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: May 4, 2015 Company: Signcrafters Lawrence Sign Recommended Quote or Bid: Signcrafters General Information: Bid or Expiration Date: N/A Amount of Quote or Bid: $41,900 $43,340 This purchase is for a new electronic entrance sign at Braemar Golf Course. The project is a 2015 approved CIP project. All labor, materials and installation are included in the quote. • The sign will be 5' x 90" and sit on a 27' Lannon Stone base. • The overall height of sign and base will be 8'. • The sign will have routed aluminum faces with acrylic backed copy as per print. • The sign will include one Daktronics Model full color electronic message center; the message center will use wireless communications. • The stone base will also have non - illuminated 12" aluminum disc with city logo print applied. • The city is responsible for control method on sign lighting. Attachments: Quote from Signcrafters Quote from Lawrence Sign City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 W • •IN��i e�e �• Deliver To: City of Edina, Minnesota FINANCE DEPARTMENT 4801 West 50th Street ° Edina, Minnesota 55424 ° (952) 927 -8861 ° FAX (952) 826 -0390 PURCHASE REQUISITION Braemar Golf Course Material Needed By: July 1, 2015 VENDOR: Signcrafters 4 QTY. DESCRIPTION DATE: 5111115 P.O. NUMBER: UNIT CHARGE PRICE AMOUNT ACCOUNT 1 Signcrafters — Golf Course Entrance Sign 2015 CIP Total $41,900.00 $41,900.00 Alternative Quotations SOURCES: 1. Signcrafters 2. Lawrence Sign 3. PREPARED BY: Joe Abood AMOUNTS OF QUOTATIONS: 1. $41,900.00 2. $43,340.00 3. APPROVED BY DEPARTMENT HEAD: Ann Kattreh, Director • Edina Park and Recreation Department Do not Mark in This Space RECEIVED 2012 APPROVED • ONE Joseph Abood Braemar Golf Course Proposal Date: 5/4/15 6364 John Harris Drive Salesperson: Mike Lawrance Edina MN 55439 Job Location: same Phone: 952- 903 -5754 Fax: 952- 903 -5751 Cell: E -mail: jabood @edinamn.gov We propose to furnish all labor and materials as needed to fabricate and install the following: One d/f monument sign as per print provided. Sign will be 5' x 90" and sit on a 27" Lannon Stone base. Overall height of sign and base to be 8'. Sign will have routed aluminum faces with acrylic backed copy as per print. Sign will include one Daktronics Model AF- 3550- 32x96- 20- RGB -2V full color electronic message center. Message center will use wireless communications. Stone base will also have non illuminated 12" aluminum disc with city logo print applied. Includes all electrical service and final connections from city ground junction box, approximately 20' from sign. City responsible for control method on sign lighting. Projected completion date is after receipt of down payment, signed contract, approved drawings and city • approval. If provisions of above include installation of sign base, sign base is bid "under normal ground conditions only". • Total bid price: $41,900.00(Does not include charges for sales tax(es), permits, permit staff time fees, engineering fees required by city for permit, any primary electrical work, and /or disposal/recycling fees) Signerafters GK &M Enterprises payment terms: Down payment ($27,000.00) balance due upon job completion and receipt of invoice. Payments not received within 30 days from date of invoice MAY render warranty null and void. All credit card payments will incur an additional $30 electronic convenience fee. All products and services purchased remain the property of GK &M Enterprises / Signerafters Outdoor until paid in full. Failure to pay may result in repossession at customer expense. Authorized signature: Note: This proposal may be withdrawn by Signctafters, GK &M Enterprises Inc., if not accepted within thirty days. I/We accept the prices, terms, conditions and/or specifications listed here and on second page, and hereby authorize you to perform the work as specified. Customer signature Date accepted • Terms of Agreement You understand that there are no oral agreements between you and GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor. ( "GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor "). All work you expect GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor to perform has been included in this proposal. Nothing in this proposal can be changed unless it is changed in writing on a separate form and signed by you and GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor. For your information, installation workers have no authority to make or sign changes to this contract. GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor provides a one (1) year limited warranty for its work, covering both labor and materials furnished by GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor. This warranty does not include damages due to negligence, vandalism, acts of nature, labor or materials not provided by GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor, or other actions beyond GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor's control. Light bulbs are not covered by this warranty. You agree to clear the work area of any obstructions prior to GK&M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor's arriving for installation. If the work area is not clear of obstructions at that time, you agree to pay any additional costs for GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor workers to wait for you to clear the obstructions so work may begin. You also are liable for scheduled trip charges if, upon arrival, the signs cannot be installed and must be returned to GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor. The parties agree this contract was made in Hennepin County, MN. Unless waived in writing by GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor, venue and jurisdiction for any and all disputes arising out of this Contract, or any other dispute between GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor and Purchaser shall be heard in the Minnesota State District Court for Hennepin County. In the event GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor is successful in any such litigation, Purchaser agrees to pay all of GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor's attorney's fees, cost and disbursements. Nothing in this proposal prevents GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor from enforcing a Mechanic's Lien, Construction Lien or other similar lien rights. This provision does not prevent GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor from agreeing, in writing to submit any disputes to arbitration, if arbitration is required in the contract, or the General Contract. You will be billed on a monthly basis and we expect that within thirty (30) days after receipt of such statement you pay the total balance owed for that period. If you fail to pay that amount you will be assessed a finance charge of one and one -half (2 %) percent per month (annual percentage rate of eighteen[18 %] percent), or a minimum finance charge of fifty ($.50) cents a month as permitted by state law. It is hereby mutually agreed upon by the parties that all fees that are billed shall be paid as set forth above, and that under no circumstances shall any amount of the fees for materials, labor, skill or other services be withheld from payment for any reason. If GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor is required to retain an attorney to collect any money you owe, you agree to pay all of GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor's attorney's fees, costs and disbursements. Any claim by you or GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor in any way arising out of this contract, and any and all other agreements between you and GK &M Enterprises dba Signcrafters Outdoor and or any way arising or related to the physical condition of the property, shall be settled by binding arbitration. ANY PERSON OR COMPANY SUPPLYING LABOR OR MATERIALS FOR THIS IMPROVEMENT TO YOUR PROPERTY, INCLUDING GK &M ENTERPRISES DBA SIGNCRAFTERS OUTDOOR, MAY FILE A LIEN AGAINST YOUR PROPERTY IF THAT PERSON OR COMPANY IS NOT PAID IN FULL FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS. THIS NOTICE IS TO ADVISE YOU OF YOUR RIGHTS UNDER MINNESOTA LAW IN CONNECTION WITH THE IMPROVEMENT TO YOUR PROPERTY. Customer Initial 0 is 0 ! ! $ ,| uRb � \} | . �\ |j}| E\ « T—T- (D to ti) tc) [ { j C\l • 0 • PREPARED FOR: Braemar Golf Course Lawwnce DATE: 3/19/2015 j TOTAL PAGES: 1 Quote # 6498 945 Pierce Butler Route St. Paul, MN 55104 Quote Line ITEM UNIT Qty TOTAL COMMENTS / QUALIFICATIONS Remove and dispose of the existing monument sign. Excavate footings, pour concrete, set anchor bolts and build masonry base. Monument Sign With 20mm Full Color Dynamic Display Masonry base stone will match existing stone at city hall. 6498 Units 1 $43,340 Manufacture and install (1) double faced monument sign with 20mm electronic messaging units. Copy - "Braemar Golf Course" "Tin Fish Grill" and "City of Edina Logo ". Primary electrical will be done by others. Applicable tax is additional. General Qualifications Manufacture, installation and shop drawings included Applicable tax is additional • Permits as required are additional at cost + $185 procurement fee Stamped engineered renderings are additional at cost if required Excavating is based on normal soil conditions Masonry work based on temps above 40° Performance and Payment bond is not included Final 120V. Electrical connection is by others 1 year parts /labor warranty , 1 year warranty on finishes. All LED lighting components carry a 5 year warranty 50% deposit required to begin manufacturing 6498N 16mm Full Color Dynamic Display Units Option $43,340 Grand Total Questions? Contact Dave Peltier 0:651-488 -6711 or C:651- 775 -6745 dpeltiernlawrencesign com 1 $2,836 Additional cost for upgrade to 16mm resolution electronic messaging units. • • w O u" �O W � wil- ;r • s • I R. SQUARE FOOTAGE: 35.83 90" TOP CAP 20" TOP CAP 86" CABINET 16" C, ABINET, 6._9.. EMC (�'�� DESCRIPTION a:)- ILLUMINATED OF MONUMENT - WHITE LED ILLUMINATION - ROUTED ALUMINUM FACES PAINTED Pt - BACKED WITH WHITE ACRYLIC - OPAQUE DIGITAL PRINT ON ALUM. PLATE FOR CITY LOGO - BLACK VINYL FOR FISH LOGO -TOP CAP TO MATCH DRIP CAP PAINT COLOR oi --FULL COLOR ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTERS OTY 2 - DAKTRONICS - FULL COLOR 20MM RGB (T -9 "H X G' -9 "W X S -D) }RASE - STONE BASE TO MATCH EDINA CITY HALL MO) - DRIP CAP TO MATCH BEIGE IN STONE FINISH SCHEDULE BROWN TO MATCH EXISTING SIGN MONUMENT SIGN 7 BEIGE TO MATCH BRICK (TOP CAP, DRIP CAP) NEED CLIENT VECTOR ART FOR CITY LOGO AND FINAL TIN FISH Lawrence ',ign vrww.lawmnesv:pn.enm !IS hmct RWlx Aa.-e. S:. Yx::l. L•Y . ",.°.i.^.'. 657.488.6711 - 600.498.8901 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 6364 JOHN HARRIS DRIVE EDINA, MN 55439 ILLUMINATED OF MONUMENT CUSTOMER APPROVAL NA7AE. DATE: Arn. AM RVi REV4 RE1I5 REVG REVi REYB SALES: OP PR: DESIGt1: RR DATE: 03.16.15 DWG: 6498 7hMr a.v. e,.4w eacMrh orDD.,N o! IMRIir 41Rn Ndevyf Irc, ed Lrru,c. SI�laroMiM T bIMar(rntl.aY a ie .mob,«:. nvy .. vrremm<a m �av mmw, �v ix. w. ww- <ef wrrr wsa..a:vr, a w.nc. skv Hmarr�Ea mocuea Ea.mae Srce , npn mmuixtwea ,teaming io m.v. piarv, mmnDwrmr a. v,D�diwn of (near o�nvv m . «na, m,n r.�n6M al 'wrn cn w of pmr0 nt r.:il r .;.rer�.a urr IuDN Sa t.m,g« CcyynQN . ^014 N w,lYx rgn Mda.rp In<. N� •,ynt, rr�nM. OELECTRIC una SIGN PAGE: 0.1 • • EDINA. MN '�ll4l • Lawrence jgn, sa wm RRRx RwN, n yR. RIN xla 651A86.67ii 800.8.8901 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 6364 JOHN HARRIS DRIVE EDINA, MN 55439 ILLUMINATED OF MONUMENT CUSTOMER APPROVAL NAME: DATE: REV, REV] RM RE" RWl REVS REV: AEVb SALES: DR PR: DESIGN: RR DATE: 03.16.15 DWG: 6499 Temea nta,a ae vie e,cR,uw vmvem m wdR.r sNn namnn Inc. aw Eam.r<. SiRnaMN In. rcult IN IM mEi�W evt a b engaaees. They a. fudnMed to Yevicemo.nr Iw Rr we aeR>. a rPw mamen�on a .nn w,tler s4, Rde�ny. Inc. ew I.awence s�pr . am m,nelacfwM :ean��K ro (nave PI✓+'+. tlKlnM�lwn er whlbnw nl Iheaa Pitns la snYnm. aher tnen mPN,'ym a Yaw cwnC,nY. a ev d nce aen5lo canlrul , INP ivn�W ra nmetllee nMm, n e +peidy RMiollab aw nll renaw !na uuv lank mUet Capyel�nl 2011 O w,inv SKn NaWiny- lx. NI edn:a mcroetl. ®ELECTRIC SIGN PAGE: 0.2 EDINA, MN • Lawrence igra 015 AiYrzY Rwln Raae, SL Rme. AIq 55!04 651.488.6711 • 800.998,8901 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 6364 JOHN HARRIS DRIVE EOINk, MN 55439 ILLUMINATED OF MONUMENT CUSTOMER APPROVAL NANIE: DATE: REVI REVS REVI REW REVS Am RW REV$ SALES: DP PR: DESIGN: RR DATE: 03.16.15 DWG: 6498 Ins R4eA ve tM exwriw wy.rty m MARUr Sqn MaWinRa Inc. Ctq lrvrene w d s W.n1M r4vWl ThollMSpntlw a M rmpbKes. e, ae rubmtlM b rm camRw lYr uw m. wnm. a wnn m.r. olanr a Y.cea..�i w.am stn xaa;ne. IM, aM Eawnnce wRn A vgn manvlYavmE acw�lnR to IMU Glanv enlelpuliun w uAlblllrvl of Atu nmploleea a pue <nmpany,lw nol mrvlru4l a aip� wni4.lo IAe ane mpm;M nere.n, is Rrerk Rronrdlea ana nR iauzr Irc vm luok amapY. fegr;Rl:! n u Waller i.Rn l4Jevtrtnc. All enull es<rvea. ® EE.EM c p y SIGN PAGE: 0.3 To: Mayor and Council From: Tim Barnes City Facility Manager Date: 05/19/15 o Cn •. o• ,C0RPOPA�. F. 1886 Agenda Item #: IV. H The Recommended Bid is Within Budget Not Within Budget Subject: Request For Purchase- Citywide Asset and Energy Management Program Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Expiration Date: 12/17/2014 Company: CR- Building Performance Specialists Inc. Recommended Quote or Bid: CR- Building Performance Specialists Inc. General Information: 06/30/2015 Amount of Quote or Bid: $88,21 66 $87,416.65 The City of Edina has over 90 facilities that serve the City and its constituency, that are valued at over $151,000,000.00. These facilities support City functions and range from city buildings, public works buildings, parks buildings, fire /police stations, pumping stations, sports facilities, etc. City Staff have been working with The Environmental and Energy Commission on ways to increase Energy efficiencies and that work has resulted in a recommendation to pursue a purchase of a facility management system that supports our investments, energy efficiency, carbon reduction and capitol planning goals. This will be a centralized database of facility and energy data that will assist in making informed decisions in regards to short and long term planning, reporting on multiple levels based on the goals at hand. For example, Energy Use Intensity EUI, carbon, Forest Carbon Index or FC1, investment opportunities, Return On Investment ROI and other sustainability metrics such as waste, water, and greenhouse gasses. This program is to be a dynamic property management tool customized to include special project considerations deemed important to the City. We would be entering into a phase one of three phases starting with our main buildings (20) that we currently have included in our B -3 benchmarking information. Originally City Staff had recommended the purchase of Centralized Energy Analytics for $54,130.00. This program we are bringing forward tonight is to replace that program. As the CAA was only a snapshot or City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Request for Purchase Page 2 monitoring of meters in buildings and did not capture the whole scope of the building envelope and evaluations of CR -BPS program. The Additional $86,886.36 $33,286.65 would be captured in leftover funding from the Energy Efficiency Fund. CR -BPS Inc. has provided this program for other municipalities within the state with great success. The Cities of Duluth and Bloomington, and Scott County have utilized this program successfully. The staffs of each respective entity highly recommended the program to us upon interviewing them. • • • + ..; BPS_ Building Performance Specialists December 17, 2014 RE: Asset and Energy Management Program City of Edina, MN Mr. Tim Barnes Facilities Manager City of Edina, MN Dear Mr. Barnes, CR- Building Performance Specialists, Inc. (CR -BPS) is pleased to submit this proposal to provide a City -wide Asset and Energy Management Program that supports your organization's facility investment, energy efficiency, carbon reduction and capital planning goals. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to work with you, and to build this dynamic program for the City's use long- term. The proposed fee for the scope of services, collecting new /confirming existing facility and energy data, and subsequent Ideas Sessions for the Asset and Energy Management Program (AEMP) for the City of Edina is as follows. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The City of Edina Facilities Management Division manages over 90 facilities that serve the City and its constituents. These facilities support City functions and range from city buildings, public works buildings, parks buildings, fire /police stations, pumping stations, sports facilities, etc. It is our understanding that the City would like a centralized database of facility and energy data that will assist in making informed decisions in regards to capital planning and budgeting, facility improvement projects and reporting on multiple levels based on the goals at hand. For example: energy (EUI), carbon, conditions (FCI), investment opportunity (1101) and other sustainability metrics such as waste, water and green house gasses. This program is to be a dynamic AEMP tool, customized to include special project considerations as deemed important to the City. Summary of Assets to Audit: The following is a list of City owned and managed assets requested to be audited: A. See Appendix A — City of Edina Building Inventory • • SCOPE OF SERVICES Task 1 — Acquire Asset Management Software Tool CR -BPS recommends the City acquire the VFA.facility asset management software tool (www.vfa.com). See 'Compensation' section for a breakdown of this fee. CR -BPS will work directly with VFA to establish the license seat on behalf of the City. VFA will invoice the City directly. Please note: CR -BPS does not benefit financially for the City purchasing VFA software — it is simply our recommended tool based on our past experience with similar Clients. Task 2 — Coordinate and Collect (Project Kick -Off Meeting) CR -BPS will collect and review all available background information including, but not limited to: drawings, Facility Briefing Package, utility data (10 years preferred), B3 data, water use /cost, etc. The City and CR -BPS will meet for a Project Kick -Off meeting. The goal of this meeting is to: • Review the City's Asset List — confirm all assets, square footages, names, etc. • Review background info • Present and review schedule • Customize VFA.facility data entry standards and protocols to align with City's standards • Identify energy /carbon (sustainability) goals • Identify other organizational goals • Task 3 -- On -site Assessments CR -BPS's Facility and Energy Assessors will conduct an on -site, physical inspection for each asset. CR -BPS shall be escorted by a City Facilities Team representative - preferably the building manager or operations director for building access and interviews. Task A — Data Entry CR -BPS will enter all facility and energy data into the software tool. Task 5 — Analyze the Data (Brainstorming - IDEAS Sessions) We have the data — now what? CR -BPS staff will meet with the City to evaluate and analyze all data collected for each asset. A Whole - Systems Thinking approach (including life -cycle analysis) will be used to assure all facility improvement considerations reach maximum benefits. IDEAS Sessions are valuable in determining the most viable course of action for building improvements including, but not limited to: • Identify energy savings opportunities • Identify carbon reduction opportunities • Evaluate funding scenarios • Establish defendable capital plans and budgets (Example: 20 yr. CIP) • Identify special project considerations • Identify investment opportunities 2 • Task 6 — Fully Populated Asset Management Program Once the VFA.facility software is fully populated, all assets have been assessed and an IDEAS Session conducted for each building group, the City will have their own login -in/ web access to this data and will be able to run standardized reports that supports their reporting and decision making processes. ADDITIONAL SERVICES On -Going Services CR -BPS is available to provide on -going services and support for the City long -term. These services will be addressed in a separate proposal. Examples of these services are as follows: • Adding additional buildings to the AEMP database (VFA Tool) —Tasks 1 -6 • Assist in development of Scope of Work requirements for future projects. For example: list requirements in RFPs such as energy savings targets, etc. • Cost estimating • Establishing design guidelines (Basis of Design) for future projects • Work with ESCO's and /or other A/E firms on City's behalf • Development of budgetary and capital planning reports • Additional training beyond standard reports • Tracking additional sustainability metrics • • Monitor and Verification of energy performance projects • Provide funding support documentation (example: grants, low- interest loans, etc.) • Presentation assistance • Energy Audits (ASHRAE Level 2 and 3) • Energy Modeling • Testing — Thermography, Blower Door, etc. • Other services as determined by mutual consent r� U SCHEDULE Mindful that this is often a multi -year implementation process - our proposed schedule for is to proceed with work in January 2015, and run until the City has a fully established AEMP. Phase 1: January - December 2015 Phase 2: January - July 2016 Phase 3: July 2016 — July 2017 See 'Compensation' section for Phasing. This schedule is subject to change. 3 COMPENSATION Compensation shall be on an hourly basis, based on actual hours worked for CR -BPS personnel assigned to the project, to be billed monthly. Our total estimated fee for the identified Scope of Services is listed below. This fee includes all reimbursable expenses. See following chart. • • Based on $0.0116 / SF • Assume 813,935 SF (for Phase 1— add additional SF in future Phases) • Agreement between VFA and City $9,441.65 annually TOTAL SOFTWARE 1. 65 aiglh&nal Services Phase 1- 813,935 SF $77,975.00 Jan -Dec 2015* Project Start Up/ Customize VFA Main Buildings w/ 133 Data (22) Fire Stations w/ B3 data (2) IDEAS Session — Main Bldgs IDEAS Session — Fire Stations Phase 2 — (To Be Verified) SF $63,750.00 * Jan —July 2016* Main Buildings w/o B3 Data (16) IDEAS Session — Main Bldgs Phase 3 — (To Be Verified) SF $56,900.00 * Aug —Aug 2017* Pumping Stations (18) Water Towers (4) Parks (26) Parking Ramps (3) Inland Marine (3) Braemar Sports Dome, Ice Rink "The Backyard" (2) IDEAS Session — Pumping Stations Bldgs IDEAS Session — Water Towers Bldgs IDEAS Session — Parks Bldgs IDEAS Session — Parking Ramps Bldgs IDEAS Session — Inland Marine Bldgs IDEAS Session — Sports Bids On-Call To be addressed in separate proposal TBD TBD * Fee and schedule to be revisited after Phase 1 completion TOTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $198,625.00 n LJ • We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal letter to provide Asset and Energy Management Services. We look forward to working with you on this project. If you have additional questions, require clarification or need additional information, you can reach me at 612.670.1108 or at Imalwitz @cr- bps.com, Respectfully Submitted, d"'7 * Laura Malwitz, MBA, LEED GA Vice President and Business Director CR- BUILDING PERFORMANCE SPECIALISTS, INC. 0 APPENDIX A City of Edina BUILDING INVENTORY LIST SF in Red = To Be Verified MAIN BLDGS - W/ 63 DATA TOTAL 789,201 789,201 1 • �11 • MAIN BLDGS - WI B3 DATA 1 Public Works 7450 Metro Boulevard New Public Works Bldg. 159,205 Y 2 Braemar Ice Arena 7501 Ikola Way - Braemar Ice Arena 143,168 Y 3 7501 (kola Way Braemar Arena East (Pavilion) 97,234 4 City Hall 4801 W. 50th Street - City Hall 69,000 5 7420 Braemar Blvd. Golf dome 6 Edinborough Park 7700 York Avenue S. Edinborough Park 42,000 Y 7 South Metro Public Safety Training 7525 BRAEMAR BLVD Community Center 38,000 Y Facility 8 Braemar Golf Dome 7420 Braemar Blvd. Dome shelter 34,018 Y 9 7501 Ikola Way Braemar Arena Hornets Nest 26,450 10 7525 Braernar Blvd Training Center 20,115 11 Braemar Golf Course Clubhouse 6364 Dewey Hill Road - Braemar Club House 18,935 Y 12 Senior Center 5280 Grandview Square Senior Center /Library 17,000 Y 13 Centennial Lakes Maintenance 7471 FRANCE AVE S Maintenance Repair 16,100 Y 14 Liquor Store York Ave 6755 York Avenue S. Liquor store 8,800 Y 15 Liquor Store Vernon Ave 5013 Vernon Avenue Liquor store 8,373 Y 16 Art Center 4701 W. 64th Street Edina art center & 7,613 Y 17 Arneson Acres Greenhouse 4711 W. 70th Street House 7,500 Y 18 Centennial Lakes Hughes Pavilion - 7471 FRANCE AVE S Park/ Recreation 6,500 Y 19 Fred Richards Golf Course Clubhouse 7640 Parklawn Avenue Normandale Golf Course 6,246 Y 20 Liquor Store 50th 3943 W. 50th Street Liquor store 5,157 Y 21 Arneson Acres Museum 4709 W 70TH ST Museum 5,000 Y 22 Fred Richards Golf Course 7640 Parklawn Avenue Maintenance Repair 2,787 Y Maintenance MAIN BLDGS - W/ 63 DATA TOTAL 789,201 789,201 1 • �11 • • MAIN BLDGS • W /OUT B3 DATA 23 5116 Brookside Avenue Water Filtration Plant 24 6364 Dewey Hill Road Braemar Golf Range bldg 25 6364 Dewey Hill Road Braemar Maintenance bldg 26 SW Corner of 6364 Dewey Hill Building Rd 27 6364 Dewey Hill Road Driving Range bldg 28 7501 Ikola Way Braemar - 3rd Sheet 29 7500 Ikola Way Braemar Compressor bldg 30 66th & Valley View Road Swimming pool /filter plant 31 7000 Dublin Road Water Reservoir 32 4400 W. 72nd Street Sewer lift station 33 Tracy Avenue & Warden Sewer lift station 34 5146 Eden Avenue Asphalt tank 35 4924 Eden Avenue Grange building 36 4924 Eden Avenue Cahill school building 37 7499 France Avenue S. Centennial Lakes 38 5701 Normandale Contents MAIN BLDGS TOTAL 789,201 • FIRE STATIONS 1 Fire Station No. 1 6250 Tracy Avenue Building 19,399 Y 2 Fire Station No 2 7335 York Ave S. Fire Station 5,335 Y FIRE STATIONS BLDGS TOTAL 24,734 24,734 • Z • WATER TOWERS • - zsu 2 4521 W. 50th Street Pumping Station 69th & France Avenue Tower 3 6305 Gleason Road 250 3 5233 Halifax Avenue Pumping Station WATER TOWERS TOTAL 250 4 Southview Lane & Concord Pumping Station Ave 250 5 5901 Ruth Drive Pumping Station 250 6 69th & France Pumping Station 250 7 5241 Sherwood Road Pumping Station 250 8 6600 Ridgeview Drive Pumping Station 250 9 5904 Hansen Road Pumping Station 250 10 4500 W. 76th Street Pumping Station 250 11 72nd & Kellogg Pumping Station 250 12 7305 York Avenue Pumping Station 250 13 6500 Dewey Hill Road Pumping Station 250 14 6721 Second Street Pumping Station 250 15 5305 Mirror Lake Drive Pumping Station 250 16 6001 Gleason Road Pumping Station 250 17 5900 Park Place Pumping Station 250 18 6754 Valley View Road Pumping Station 250 PUMPING STATIONS TOTAL 4,500 WATER TOWERS 1 5844 Concord Avenue Tower 2 69th & France Avenue Tower 3 6305 Gleason Road Tower 4 4935 Lincoln Drive Tower WATER TOWERS TOTAL 0 3 • PARKS Cornelia School 7142 Cornelia Drive Building 1 Alden Park 6750 Belmore Lane Building 2 Arden Park 5230 Minnehaha Blvd. Building 3 Strachauer Park 6200 Beard Avenue S. Building 4 Birchcrest Park 6016 Hansen Road Playground 5 Braemar Baseball Complex 7301 S. County Road 18 Building 6 Chowen Park 5700 Chowen Avenue S. Building 7 Cornelia Pool 4300 W. 661h Street Building (Shelter) 8 Cornelia School 7142 Cornelia Drive Building 9 Countryside Park 6240 Tracy Avenue Building 10 Creek Valley Gleason & 64th Building 11 Todd Park 4429 Vandervoork Avenue S. Building 12 Garden Park 5520 Hansen Road Comfort Station 13 Heights Park 5520 W. 66th Street Amusement Equip in Open 14 Highlands Park 5200 Doncaster Way Building 15 McGuire Park 69th & McGuire Road Playground 16 Normandale Park 6501 Warren Avenue Building 17 Pamela Park 5900 Park Place Building 18 Tingdale Park 59th & Tingdale Playground 19 Utley Park 50111 & Wooddale Tennis Court Fencing • 20 Walnut Ridge Park 5801 Londonderry Building 21 Weber Park 4115 Grimes Avenue Building 22 Wooddale Park 50th and Wooddale Fencing 23 York Park 5448 York Avenue S. Playground 24 Lewis Park Dewey Hill & Cahill Road Building 25 Kojetin Street Park 4201 W. 44th Street Playground 26 Van Valkenberg Park 4935 Lincoln Drive Building PARKS TOTAL • 4 1 4050 W. 51stStreet Building 2 3925 W. 49 112 Street Building 3 3925 W. 49 1/2 Street Building PARKING RAMP TOTAL INLAND MARINE — 1 Foxmeadow Park 5051 Blake Road 64' Antenna 2 Braemar Park 7404 Gleason 64' Antenna 3 Braemar Park 7404 Gleason 64' Antenna INLAND MARINE TOTAL C r� �J C7 • To: Mayor- and Council From: Tim Barnes City Facility Manager TT Date: 05/19115 Subject: Request For Purchase- Professional Service Braun Intertec Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: 04/13/2015 Company: Braun Intertec Geothermal Recommended Quote or Bid: Braun Intertec Geothermal General Information: o e r �� �ti7.•rittruFt.���� � Agenda Item #: IV. I The Recommended Bid is F7 Within Budget E] Not Within Budget Bid or Expiration Date: 05/22/2015 Amount of Quote or Bid: $28,000.00 The City of Edina Public Works Facility at 7450 Metro Boulevard was built in 2009 with a geothermal ground heat exchanger system. The 2015 Capital Improvement Plan includes $150,000.00 of funding for our geothermal system repair. We were having multiple compressor failures that we could not figure out what was causing them. Each compressor was covered under warranty but the labor charge was not. We started that process off with a recomissioning of the system to verify the proper installation and settings and examination of the proper pressures to verify the system was installed and operating to the original design specifications. This was at a cost of $6,000.00 and we utilized the original design engineer and original contractors involved with the system. The outcome of this work detected the problem we were having and also the solution. At no extra cost the original contractors corrected the mechanical issues and reprogrammed the control sequences for the most effective and efficient operation. A mechanical repair associated with the compressor failure cost $4,200.00 and this was also performed. This brings our total so far to $10,200. While we have been working on the mechanical side two underground leaks were detected in the ground heat exchanger. We should note that these leaks have been isolated, while still maintaining system operation, and duly reported to the appropriate agencies. This part of the system exits the building and has several circuits that lay under the Public Works staff parking lot. City staff have looked at several different options for the detection, excavation City of Edina 4801 W. 501h St. Edina, MN 55424 • Request for Purchase Page 2 and repair of this problem, and Braun Intertec has come forward as the sole source and leading company in the state in the detection and repair of ground heat exchangers. City Staff recommends that we obtain their services for this repair. They have Quoted $28,000.00 for the detection, repair, documentation and commissioning of this system. The cost of restoration of sod or asphalt will be borne by the City. The Public Works Employee parking lot, under which a majority of the ground heat exchanger lies, is valued in the range of $25,000.00 to $30,000.00. City staff is working out contingencies, if in fact the whole lot has to be disturbed and replaced. We should point out that this number for the asphalt repair will be varying depending on the location of the leaks. City Staff is confident we will be under the CIP Budget on this repair. • is • BRAUNBraun Intertec Geothermal, LLC Phone: 952.995.2000 NTE RTEC 11001 Hampshire Avenue S I Fax: 952.995.2908 Minneapolis, MN 55438 Web: braunintertec.com The Science You Build on. April 13, 2015 Tim Barnes Edina Public Works 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 Proposal QTG000249 Re: Proposal for Ground Heat Exchanger Leak Detection and Rehabilitation Services Edina Public Works Facility Edina, Minnesota Dear Mr. Barnes, Braun Intertec Geothermal, LLC is pleased to present this proposal for leak detection and rehabilitation services for the ground heat exchanger (GHX) located at the Edina Public Works facility located in Edina, Minnesota. Our proposed scope of services, schedule and estimated costs for the work is described below. Scope of Services AA /E0E ■ Mobilization of manpower and equipment to site. ■ Pressure testing to confirm presence of leak(s). ■ Set up of leak detection equipment. ■ Materials and labor for the injection of a non - flammable, non - toxic, non - corrosive trace gas to the GHX circuits to facilitate detection with handheld equipment. ■ On -grade identification and delineation of excavation points from which to access buried pipe locations for repair. ■ Excavation at delineated point(s) of interest. ■ Repair of identified leaks in the excavated GHX piping. ■ Backfill and compaction of excavated areas. ® Isolation of unaffected circuits and flushing of all debris and purging of all air in repaired circuitry. ■ Hydrostatic pressure testing of circuit to observe leak -free integrity per ASTM F2164. ■ Supply and installation of heat transfer fluid into repaired circuit(s). Edina Public Works Facility Proposal QTG000249 April 13, 2015 Page 2 ■ Heat transfer fluid sampling and analysis. ■ Project management, coordination and full reporting in accordance with Minnesota Department of Health requirements. Cost Detail Due to the unpredictable nature of this type of work, we propose a time and materials arrangement in accordance with the following fee schedule: Personnel Rate Principal Consultant $ 250 per hour Principal Scientist $ 206 per hour Environmental Consultant $ 175 per hour Staff Mechanical Engineer $ 170 per hour Operations Supervisor $ 150 per hour Project Manager $ 135 per hour Building Scientist Professional $ 129 per hour Building Sciences Trip Charge $ 100 per site visit Engineering Technician $ 120 per hour Technician III $ 90 per hour Technician II $ 85 per hour Project Assistant $ 95 per hour Equipment Leak Detection Equipment $ 850 per day Excavator $ 460 per day Vac Truck $ 380 per day Skid Steer $ 175 per day Compactor $ 110 per day Medium Duty Truck $ 130 per day Medium Duty Truck Mileage $ 0.75 per mile Trailer Mileage $ 0.20 per mile Expenses Laboratory HTF Sample Analysis & Report $ 150 per sample Inert Gas $ 100 per bottle Misc. Reimbursable Expenses Cost plus 15% While we cannot guarantee final cost, we estimate a budget of $ 28,000 will be required to complete the above described full scope of work. Schedule To be determined with Client. Results of leak detection improve when the work is performed after frost is out of the ground. BRAUN INTERTEC reTamflum • Edina Public Works Facility Proposal QTG000249 April 13, 2015 Page 3 Advisories, Specific Stipulations and Exclusions from Scope ■ If any portion of the suspected leaking ground heat exchanger is believed to be installed beneath a paved surface, multiple —5/8" holes will need to be drilled through the paved surface to enable leak detection. Sealing of these holes, if required, will be at additional cost. ■ Proposal assumes ground heat exchanger installation area is accessible by foot and all on -grade obstructions, including snow, stock piles, loose brush, automobiles, equipment, etc. are removed. Proposal specifically excludes costs associated with removing obstructions. ■ Leak detection involves drilling of multiple small diameter holes to allow trace gas to be sensed and leak areas to be located. Such holes may be drilled anywhere within the boundaries of known or suspected GHX installation areas and may be bored deeper than 18" to overcome frost, paving, etc. ■ It is Braun Intertec Geothermal's responsibility to request locating of public utilities. It is the site owner's responsibility to mark the locations of private utilities and other buried structures prior to our arrival on site. ■ Determining the exact locations of buried leaks is unpredictable. Variables such as soil types, ambient conditions, frost, paving /hard surfacing, quantity of leaks, and other factors can affect the release of tracer gas and may affect the precision of buried leak locating. False positive locating and unnecessary exploratory excavation are minimized with this method but still possible. If excavation is excluded from this Scope of Work, Braun Intertec and its subcontractors accept no liability for unnecessary excavation, damage, or lost time of any kind. We require a member of Edina Public Works staff to be available to provide access to the building and to provide mechanical system support. ■ Costing assumes that excavated areas will be backfilled and compacted and left at rough grade for others to replaced final cover such as sod, curb and bituminous as needed. General Remarks Braun Intertec appreciates the opportunity to present this proposal to you. It is being sent in an electronic version only. A hard copy of the proposal will be supplied upon request. Please return a signed copy of the proposal in its entirety. The proposed fee is based on the scope of services described and the assumption that our services will be authorized within 30 days and that others will not delay us beyond our proposed schedule. BRAUN INTERTEC MHOTPRIM Edina Public Works Facility Proposal QTG000249 April 13, 2015 Page 4 We include the Braun Intertec General Conditions, which provide additional terms and are a part of our agreement. We appreciate the opportunity to provide professional services for you on this project. If you have questions regarding the contents of this proposal, please contact Justin Sterner at 952.995.2416. Sincerely, BRAUN INTFRTFC ,FnTHFRMAL, LLC Justin R. Sterner Operations Supervisor Scott A. Freitag, CGD Principal Attachments: General Conditions (9/01/13) The proposal is accepted, and you are authorized to proceed. Authorizer's Firm Authorizer's Signature Authorizer's Name (please print or type) Authorizer's Title Date GEOTHERMAL • • 0 General Conditions Section 1: Our Agreement 1.1 Our agreement ( "Agreement') with you consists of these General Conditions and the accompanying written proposal or authorization. This Agreement is our entire agreement. It supersedes prior agreements. It may be modified only in a writing signed by us, making specific reference to the provision modified. 1.2 The words "you," "we," 'us," and "our" include officers, employees, and subcontractors. 1.3 in the event you use a purchase order or other form to authorize our services, any conflicting or additional terms are not part of our Agreement. Directing us to start work prior to execution of this Agreement constitutes your acceptance. If, however, mutually acceptable terms cannot be established, we have the right to withdraw our proposal without liability to you or others, and you will compensate us for services already rendered. Section 2: Our Responsibilities 2.1 We will provide the services specifically described in our Agreement with you. You agree that we are not responsible for services that are not fairly Included in our specific undertaking. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, our findings, opinions, and recommendations will be provided to you in writing. You agree not to rely on oral findings, opinions, or recommendations without our written approval. 2.2 In performing our professional services, we will use that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable members of our profession practicing in the same locality. If you direct us to deviate from our recommended procedures, you agree to hold us harmless from claims, damages, and expenses arising out of your direction. 2.3 We will reference our field observations and sampling to available reference points, but we will not survey, set, or check the accuracy of those points unless we accept that duty in writing. Locations of field observations or sampling described in our report or shown on our sketches are based on information provided by others or estimates made by our personnel. You agree that such dimensions, depths, or elevations are approximations unless specifically stated otherwise in the report. You accept the inherent risk that samples or observations may not be representative of things not sampled or seen and, further, that site conditions may change over time. 2.4 Our duties do not include supervising your contractors or commenting on, overseeing, or providing the means and methods of their work, unless we accept such duties in writing. GC We will not be responsible for the failure of your contractors to perform in accordance with their undertakings, and the providing of our services will not relieve others of their responsibilities to you or to others. 2.5 We will provide a health and safety program for our employees, but we will not be responsible for contractor, job, or site health or safety unless we accept that duty in writing. 2.6 You will provide, at no cost to us, appropriate site safety measures as to work areas to be observed or inspected by us. Our employees are authorized by you to refuse to work under conditions that may be unsafe. 2.7 Estimates of our fees or other project costs will be based on Information available to us and on our experience and knowledge. Such estimates are an exercise of our professional judgment and are not guaranteed or warranted. Actual costs may vary. You should allow a contingency in addition to estimated costs. Section 3: Your Responsibilities 3.1 You will provide us with prior geotechnical and other reports, s,)ecifications, plans, and information to which you have access about the site. You agree to provide us with all plans, changes in plans, and new information as to site conditions until we have completed our work. 3.2 You will provide access to the site. In the course of our work some site damage is normal even when due care is exercised. We will use reasonable care to minimize damage to the site. We have not included the cost of restoration of normal damage in the estimated charges. 3.3 You agree to provide us, in a timely manner, with information that you have regarding buried objects at the site. We will not be responsible for locating buried objects at the site unless we accept that duty in writing. You agree to hold us harmless from claims, damages, losses, and related expenses involving buried objects that were not properly marked or identified or of which you had knowledge but did not timely call to our attention or correctly show on the plans you or others on your behalf furnished to us. 3.4 You will notify us of any knowledge or suspicion of the presence of hazardous or dangerous materials in a sample provided to us. You agree to provide us with information in your possession or control relating to contamination at the work site. If we observe or suspect the presence of contaminants not anticipated in our Agreement, we may terminate our work without liability to you or to others, and we will be paid for the services we have provided. 3.5 Neither this Agreement nor the providing of services will operate to make us an owner, operator, generator, transporter, treater, storer, or a disposal facility within the meaning of the Resource Conservation Recovery Act, as amended, or within the meaning of any other law governing the handling, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials. You agree to hold us harmless and indemnify us from any such claim or loss. 3.6 Monitoring wells are your property, and you are responsible for their permitting, maintenance, and abandonment unless we accept that duty in writing. 3.7 You agree to make disclosures required by law. In the event you do not own the site, you acknowledge that it is your duty to inform the owner of the discovery or release of contaminants at the site. You agree to hold us harmless and indemnify us from claims related to disclosures made by us that are required by law and from claims related to the informing or failure to inform the site owner of the discovery of contaminants. Section 4: Reports and Records 4.1 Unless you request otherwise, we will provide our report in an electronic format. 4.2 Our reports, notes, calculations, and other documents and our computer software and data are instruments of our service to you, and they remain our property but are subject to a license to you for your use in the related project for the purposes disclosed to us. You may not transfer our reports to others or use them for a purpose for which they were not prepared without our written approval. You agree to indemnify and hold us harmless from claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of such a transfer or use. At your request, we will provide endorsements of our reports or letters of reliance, but only if the recipients agree to be bound by the terms of our agreement with you and only if we are paid the administrative fee stated in our then current Schedule of Charges. 4.3 Because electronic documents may be modified Intentionally or inadvertently, you agree that we will not be liable for damages resulting from change in an electronic document occurring after we transmit it to you. 4.4 If you do not pay for our services in full as agreed, we may retain work not yet delivered to you and you agree to return to us all of our work that is in your possession or under your control. 4.5 Samples and field data remaining after tests are conducted and field and laboratory equipment that cannot be adequately cleansed of contaminants are and continue to be your property. They may be discarded or returned to Page 1 of 2 you, at our discretion, unless within 15 days of the report date you give us written direction to store or transfer the materials at your expense. 4.6 Electronic data, reports, photographs, samples and other materials provided by you or others may be discarded or returned to you, at our discretion, unless within 15 days of the report date you give us written direction to store or transfer the materials at your expense. Section 5: Compensation 5.1 You will pay for services as agreed upon or according to our then current Schedule of Charges if there is no other written agreement as to price. An estimated cost is not a firm figure. You agree to pay all sales taxes and other taxes based on your payment of our compensation. Our performance Is subject to credit approval and payment of any specified retainer. 5.2 You will notify us of billing disputes within 15 days. You will pay undisputed portions of invoices on receipt. You agree to pay interest on unpaid balances beginning 30 days after invoice dates at the rate of 1.5% per month, or atthe maximum rate allowed by law. 5.3 If you direct us to Invoice another, we will do so, but you agree to be responsible for our compensation unless you provide us with that person's written acceptance of all terms of our Agreement and we agree to extend credit to that person and to release you. 5.4 Your obligation to pay for our services under this Agreement is not contingent on your ability to obtain financing, governmental or regulatory agency approval, permits, final adjudication of lawsuit in which we are not involved, your successful completion of a project, receipt of payment from another, or any other event. No retainage will be withheld. 5.5 If you do not pay us within 60 days of invoice date, you agree to reimburse our expenses, including but not limited to attorney fees, staff time, and other costs of collection. 5.6 You agree to compensate us in accordance with our fee schedule if we are asked or required to respond to legal process arising out of a proceeding related to the project and as to which we are not a party. 5.7 If we are delayed by factors beyond our control, or if project conditions or the scope or amount of work change, or if changed labor union conditions result in increased costs, decreased efficiency, or delays, or if the standards or methods change, we will give you timely notice and we will receive an equitable adjustment of our compensation. If you and we do not reach agreement on such compensation within 30 days of our written application, we may terminate without liability to you or others. 5.8 If you fail to pay us within 60 days following invoice date, we may consider the default a total breach of our Agreement and, at our option, terminate our duties without liability to you or to others. 5.9 In consideration of our providing insurance to cover claims made by you, you hereby waive any right of offset as to fees otherwise due us. Section 6: Disputes, Damage, and Risk Allocation 6.1 Each of us will exercise good faith efforts to resolve disputes without litigation. Such efforts will include, but not be limited to, a meeting(s) attended by each party's representative(s) empowered to resolve the dispute. Before either of us commences an action against the other, disputes (except collections) will be submitted to mediation. 6.2 Neither of us will be liable for special, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages, including but not limited to those arising from delay, loss of use, loss of profits or revenue, loss of financing commitments or fees, or the cost of capital. 6.3 We will not be liable for damages unless suit is commenced within two years of the date of injury or loss or within two years of the date of substantial completion of our services, whichever is earlier. We will not be liable unless you have notified us of the discovery of the claimed breach of contract, negligent act, or omission within 30 days of the date of discovery and unless you have given us an opportunity to investigate and to recommend ways of mitigating damages. You agree not to make a claim against us unless you have provided us at least 30 days prior to the institution of any legal proceeding against us with a written certificate executed by an appropriately licensed professional specifying and certifying each and every act or omission that you contend constitutes a violation of the standard of care governing our professional services. 6.4 For you to obtain the benefit of a fee which Includes a reasonable allowance for risks, you agree that our aggregate liability for all claims will not exceed the fee paid for our services or $50,000, whichever is greater. If you are unwilling to accept this allocation of risk, we will increase our aggregate liability to $100,000 provided that, within 10 days of the date of our Agreement, you provide payment in an amount that will increase our fees by 10 %, but not less than $500, to compensate us for the greater risk undertaken. This increased fee is not the purchase of insurance. 6.5 You agree to indemnify us from all liability to others In excess of the risk allocation stated above and to insure this obligation. 6.6 The prevailing party in any action relating to this Agreement shall be entitled to recover Its costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, staff time, and expert witness fees. 6.7 The law of the state in which our servicing office is located will govern all disputes. Each of us waives trial byjury. No officer or employee acting within the scope of employment shall have individual liability for his or her acts or omissions, and you agree not to make a claim against individual employees. Section 7: General Indemnification 7.1 We will Indemnify and hold you harmless from and against demands, damages, and expenses of others to the comparative extent they are caused by our negligent acts or omissions or those negligent acts or omissions of persons for whom we are legally responsible. You will indemnify and hold us harmless from and against demands, damages, and expenses of others to the comparative extent they are caused by your negligent acts or omissions or those negligent acts or omissions of persons for whom you are legally responslble. 7.2 To the extent It maybe necessary to indemnify either of us under Section 7.1, you and we expressly waive, in favor of the other only, any Immunity or exemption from liability that exists under any worker compensation law. 7.3 You agree to indemnify us against losses and costs arising out of claims of patent or copyright infringement as to any process or system that is specified or selected by you or by others on your behalf. Section 8: Miscellaneous Provisions 8.1 We will provide a certificate of insurance to you upon request. Any claim as an Additional Insured shall be limited to losses caused by our sole negligence. 8.2 You and we, for ourselves and our insurers, waive all claims and rights of subrogation for losses arising out of causes of loss covered by our respective insurance policies. 8.3 Neither of us will assign nor transfer any interest, any claim, any cause of action, or any right against the other. Neither of us will assign or otherwise transfer or encumber any proceeds or expected proceeds or compensation from the project or project claims to any third person, whether directly or as collateral or otherwise. 8.4 Our Agreement may be terminated early only in writing. We will receive an equitable adjustment of our compensation in the event of early termination. 8.5 If a provision of this Agreement is invalid or illegal, all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. GC Revised 9/1/2013 Page 2 of 2 • To: Mayor and Council From: Brian E. Olson, Public Works Director EEO Date: 05/19/2015 i� aer�� • !�CY)RPORAK�O • Joao Agenda Item #: IV. J The Recommended Bid is CXJ Within Budget ❑ Not Within Budget Subject: Purchase of a 2016 F550 Pickup Truck, Public Works — Concrete Streets Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Expiration Date: 05/01/2015 06/01/2015 Company: Amount of Quote or Bid: Midway Ford, state contract #74464 $53,236.60 ABM equipment, state contract #84870 Recommended Quote or Bid: Midway Ford, $32,467.00 ABM equipment, $20,772.00 General Information: This is a replacement for 25 -333, a 2003 GMC 3500 truck with a utility box that is well worn with 63,114 miles on it and is under powered for the job that is expected of it. Because of its lack of power and pulling capacity the crew that uses 25 -333, have to drive two vehicles to a job site, one to pull a trailer with equipment on it and 25 -333 which has all the tools on it. By buying the above mentioned truck we would then eliminate the need to have two trucks going to the job site. Our new equipment replacement scoring methodology uses six performance and cost variables including age, usage, type of service, condition, repair costs, and reliability. Replacement qualification scores are, 23 for all sedans and light trucks and 28 for heavy duty vehicles and off road equipment whose gross weight rating (GVWR) exceeds 10,500. The higher the score, the higher the need to replace the vehicle. In other words, we will not replace a heavy duty vehicle that does not have a minimum score of 28. This piece of equipment has a score of 29. • Probably the most difficult issue facing a city fleet is deciding the best time to replace equipment. If you replace the fleet too soon, you lose useful life and deplete capital funds. Waiting too long puts a financial • burden on the operations and maintenance budget. When a vehicle is within two (2) years or 10,000 miles of replacement, it becomes eligible for replacement scoring. If the vehicle /equipment scores below the criteria number, it is evaluated on an annual basis until replaced. *Scoring Model The scoring is totaled using scores on the following six performance and cost variables: • Age: One point for each twelve months of service -life. • Usage: Odometer -based vehicles =one point for each 10,000 miles Hour meter -based small equipment =one point for each 325 hours Hour meter -based large trucks /equipment =one point for each 750 hours • Type of Service: 1 to 5 points based on severity of service, i.e., one (1) for an administrative care, five (5) for a triple- shifted police patrol car or sewer fetter. • Reliability: Calculated as the ratio of the number of "normal" repair occurrences over the last twelve months (LTM) of service divided by the number of "normal" repair occurrences in the vehicle's second • twelve months (STM) of life. For example, if the LTM is 6 and the STM is 2, the Reliability Score would be 3 (6/2). "Normal occurrences" exclude planned maintenance (PMs) and all "non - normal" repairs, i.e., accidents, flats, Acts of God, driver related, warranty, etc. Condition: The score is scaled from 1 to 5 based on an inspection of the body, underbody and structural members, rust, interior condition, a review of accident and repair history, any operational problems and anticipated major repairs within the next budget year. A score of 5 would be in very poor condition with high expectations for major future expenses. • Repair Costs: 1 to 5 points are assigned based on total life -to -date (LTD) repair costs (excluding "non - normal" repairs) and the original purchase price of the vehicle. A 5 is scored for a vehicle whose LTD repair costs exceed the original purchase price. A score of 1 is given to a vehicle whose LTD repair costs are 20% or less of the original purchase price; a 2 for 40 %, 3 for 60% and 4 for 80 %. Replacement qualification scores are, 23 for all sedans and light trucks and 28 for heavy duty vehicles and off road equipment whose gross weight rating (GVWR) exceeds 10,500 0 To: Mayor and City Council From: Brian E. Olson, Public works Director EEO Date: 05/19/2015 Subject: Purchase of a 2016 F550 with Utility box, Public Works - Utility A. � f� k e rCn o o. 7tlN.1 Agenda Item #: IV. K The Recommended Bid is M Within Budget ❑ Not Within Budget Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Expiration Date: 04/27/2016 05/27/2015 Company: Amount of Quote or Bid: Midway ford, State contract #74464 $55,881.60 ABM. Equipment, state contract # 84870 Recommended Quote or Bid: • Midway ford, $32,467.60 ABM Equipment, $23,414.00 General Information: This is a replacement for vehicle 70 -339, it is a 2003 F450 with 87,179 miles on it. We considered a more fuel efficient option but we found it necessary to change the F450 to a F550 as we legally cannot tow the larger utilities generators that are necessary during an emergency. Our new equipment replacement scoring methodology uses six performance and cost variables including age, usage, type of service, condition, repair costs, and reliability. Replacement qualification scores are, 23 for all sedans and light trucks and 28 for heavy duty vehicles and off road equipment whose gross weight rating (GVWR) exceeds 10,500. The higher the score, the higher the need to replace the vehicle. In other words, we will not replace a heavy duty vehicle that does not have a minimum score of 28. This piece of equipment has a score of 30. I] Probably the most difficult issue facing a city fleet is deciding the best time to replace equipment. If you replace the fleet too soon, you lose useful life and deplete capital funds. Waiting too long puts a financial • burden on the operations and maintenance budget. When a vehicle is within two (2) years or 10,000 miles of replacement, it becomes eligible for replacement scoring. If the vehicle /equipment scores below the criteria number, it is evaluated on an annual basis until replaced. *ScorinE Model The scoring is totaled using scores on the following six performance and cost variables: • Age: One point for each twelve months of service -life. • Usage: Odometer -based vehicles =one point for each 10,000 miles Hour meter -based small equipment =one point for each 325 hours Hour meter -based large trucks /equipment =one point for each 750 hours • Type of Service: 1 to 5 points based on severity of service, i.e., one (1) for an administrative care, five (5) for a triple- shifted police patrol car or sewer jetter. • Reliability: Calculated as the ratio of the number of "normal" repair occurrences over the last twelve months (LTM) of service divided by the number of "normal" repair occurrences in the vehicle's second • twelve months (STM) of life. For example, if the LTM is 6 and the STM is 2, the Reliability Score would be 3 (6/2). "Normal occurrences" exclude planned maintenance (PMs) and all "non - normal" repairs, i.e., accidents, flats, Acts of God, driver related, warranty, etc. Condition: The score is scaled from 1 to 5 based on an inspection of the body, underbody and structural members, rust, interior condition, a review of accident and repair history, any operational problems and anticipated major repairs within the next budget year. A score of 5 would be in very poor condition with high expectations for major future expenses. • Repair Costs: 1 to 5 points are assigned based on total life -to -date (LTD) repair costs (excluding "non - normal" repairs) and the original purchase price of the vehicle. A 5 is scored for a vehicle whose LTD repair costs exceed the original purchase price. A score of 1 is given to a vehicle whose LTD repair costs are 20% or less of the original purchase price; a 2 for 40 %, 3 for 60% and 4 for 80 %. Replacement qualification scores are, 23 for all sedans and light trucks and 28 for heavy duty vehicles and off road equipment whose gross weight rating (GVWR) exceeds 10,500 • From: Brian E. Olson, Public Works Director EEO Date: 05/19/2015 ��tr1A, � 0 Ce. :,NJ � p 1 8 Agenda Item #: IV. L The Recommended Bid is J Within Budget ❑ Not Within Budget Subject: Purchase of Crosswalk Installation Services at 50th France Business District Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Expiration Date: 05/06/2015 06/06/2015 Company: Amount of Quote or Bid: Sir Lines A Lot Line Striping Company $28,930.00 Century Fence Company $29,173.00 Warning Lites $29,800.00 AAA Striping Service Company $48,058.50 isRecommended Quote or Bid: Sir Lines A Lot Line Striping Company $28,930.00 General Information: The Traffic Safety Committee, Edina Transportation Committee and ultimately the City Council directed the installation of five enhanced rapid flashing beacon crosswalks in the 5011, and France business district. The Edina Public Works Department recommends that the installation of these signals be in conjunction with new thermoplastic pavement markings. We received four quotes and have already purchased the materials to install. Due to the location and need for a quick turnaround we have recommended that the installation be done with the bigger equipment that these contractors have to grind and install the pavement markings. The funding for the installation is paid for with the Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund. 0 To: Mayor and City Council From: Eric Boettcher Parks & Recreation Department Recreation Supervisor Date: May 19, 2015 ch • Cortro8 ,t�9 • Agenda Item #: IV.M. Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Subject: Resolution No. 2015 -52 Accepting Hennepin County Public Space Recycling Grant Action Requested: Adopt resolution and approve agreement Information / Background: The Hennepin County Public Space Recycling Grant is a funding source to help fund recycling containers to City of Edina parks and facilities. This grant will be used to fund containers to be placed at Van Valkenburg Park, Highlands Park, Weber Park, Braemar Arena and Braemar Field. This project will help us reduce waste, provide cleaner public areas and create awareness to our park users and athletic groups. Included in this project are measures to track the amount of trash that is collected, provide communication to the park users and athletic groups and evaluate the success through measuring amounts collected and surveying user groups. The grant will provide $9,900 for purchasing recycling containers. Attachments: Resolution No. 2015 -52 Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 • • RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -52 ACCEPTING GRANT AND APPROVING AGREEMENT HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC SPACE RECYCLING WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 allows cities to accept grants and donations of real or personal property for the benefit of its citizens; and 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 Parks & Recreation: Hennepin County Grant Dated: May 19`h, 2015 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA) $9,900.00 Purchase of Recycling Containers James B. Hovland, Mayor 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 May 19, 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of City Clerk U Contract No: A142800 PUBLIC SPACE RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT This Agreement is, between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA, A -2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 ( "COUNTY "), on behalf of the Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy, 701 South Fourth Street, Suite 700, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 ( "DEPARTMENT ") and the City of Edina, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, MN 55424 ( "GRANTEE "). WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Board has established a Public Space Recycling Grant Program to provide funding ( "Incentive Funds ") to selected eligible waste abatement projects; and WHEREAS, the GRANTEE has made an application for a waste abatement project and has been selected for funding of said described project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement (application copy attached as Exhibit A); NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: TERM AND COST OF THE AGREEMENT This Agreement shall commence upon execution and.terminate July 31, 2016, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the Default and Cancellation provisions of this Agreement. The total cost of this Agreement, including all reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($9,900.00). 2. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED a. The GRANTEE will operate its waste abatement project (hereinafter the "Project"), including the proposed Project budget, as described in the application submitted by the GRANTEE and kept on file with the COUNTY (See Exhibit A). b. In addition to the services referred to above, the GRANTEE agrees: 1. The GRANTEE shall submit to the DEPARTMENT an interim report by October 30, 2015, and a final report by June 15, 2016. The reports should include at a minimum: • Project summary; • Results achieved; • Amount of material collected, recycled, and disposed; • Obstacles /challenges encountered; • (Public Space Recycling Grant - 1/2015) ■ Recommendations; ■ Detailed budget expenditures; and ■ Cost/benefit analysis of the Project. The COUNTY shall have full ownership and control of all reports, which includes the right of the COUNTY to use any data and information contained in such project report in any manner the COUNTY determines, including but not limited to case studies or public presentations. 2. All containers funded by COUNTY Incentive Funds shall prominently display, on all accessible sides, weather - resistant labels that designate the container for recycling. The labels shall include at a minimum: ■ The preferred COUNTY symbol for recycling; ■ Photo images of recyclable materials; and ■ The preferred COUNTY terms for recyclable materials. All labels shall be approved by the DEPARTMENT prior to production. The GRANTEE may request customized recycling container labels from the DEPARTMENT at no additional expense to the GRANTEE. 3. All recycling containers funded by COUNTY Incentive Funds shall be co- located with trash containers. 4. All Incentive Funds accepted from the COUNTY over the term of the Agreement shall be used solely for Project expenses relating to waste reduction and recycling, as described in the Project. The GRANTEE shall not retain any Incentive Funds in excess of actual Project expenses and shall return any such excess Incentive Funds to the COUNTY upon completion of the Project. 5. The GRANTEE may not charge its residents through property tax, utility fees, special fees or any other method for that portion of the costs of the Project that is funded by COUNTY Incentive Funds. 6. The GRANTEE shall establish a separate accounting mechanism, such as a Project number, activity number, cost center, or fund that will separate Incentive Fund revenues and expenditures from all other GRANTEE activities. 7. Incentive Fund Project activities, revenues, and expenditures are subject to audit by the COUNTY to ensure compliance with the purpose of this grant. Any Incentive Fund expenditures not approved shall be returned to the COUNTY. c. All right, title and interest in all copyrightable material which the GRANTEE may conceive or originate either individually or jointly with others, and which arises out of 0 (Public Space Recycling Grant - 1/2015) 2 • the performance of this Agreement, are the property of the COUNTY. The GRANTEE shall assign to the COUNTY all right, title, interest and copyrights of the copyrightable material. The GRANTEE also agrees, upon request of the COUNTY, to execute all papers and perform all other acts necessary to assist the COUNTY to obtain and register copyrights on those materials. Where applicable, works for authorship created by the GRANTEE for the COUNTY in performance of this Agreement shall be considered "works made for hire" as defined in the U.S. Copyright Act. d. The GRANTEE hereby warrants that, when legally required, the GRANTEE shall obtain the written consent of both the owner and licensor to reproduce, publish, and/or use any material supplied to the COUNTY including but not limited to software, hardware, documentation, and /or any other item. The GRANTEE further warrants that any material or item delivered by the GRANTEE will not violate the United States Copyright Law or any property right of another and agrees that the GRANTEE shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, volunteers, and employees, at the GRANTEE's own expense against any alleged infringement of any copyright or property right. 3. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES The COUNTY shall pay Incentive Funds to the GRANTEE in an amount not -to- exceed • Nine thousand nine hundred dollars ($9,900.00). The first Incentive Fund payment of Four thousand nine hundred fifty dollars ($4,950.00), 50% of the total grant amount, shall be disbursed upon execution of the Agreement. The second Incentive Fund payment of Two thousand nine hundred seventy dollars ($2,970.00), 30% of the total grant amount, shall be disbursed upon approval of the interim Project report. The final Incentive Fund payment of One thousand nine hundred eighty dollars ($1,980.00), 20% of total grant amount, or remaining funds, shall be disbursed upon approval of the final Project report. 4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR GRANTEE shall select the means, method, and manner of performing the services. Nothing is intended or should be construed as creating or establishing the relationship of a partnership or a joint venture between the parties or as constituting GRANTEE as the agent, representative, or employee of the COUNTY for any purpose. - GRANTEE is and shall remain an independent contractor for all services performed under this Agreement. GRANTEE shall secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any personnel of GRANTEE or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by GRANTEE will have no contractual relationship with the COUNTY and will not be considered employees of the COUNTY. The COUNTY shall not be responsible for any claims that arise out of employment or alleged employment under the Minnesota Unemployment Insurance Law or the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of any personnel, including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against GRANTEE, its officers, agents, (Public Space Recycling Grant - 1/2015) • contractors, or employees. Such personnel or other persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind from the COUNTY, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, workers' compensation, unemployment compensation, disability, severance pay, and retirement benefits. 5. INDEMNIFICATION GRANTEE agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, volunteers and employees from any liability, claims, causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of GRANTEE, a subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or omissions they may be liable in the performance of the services required by this Agreement, and against all loss by reason of the failure of GRANTEE to perform any obligation under this Agreement. 6. INSURANCE A. GRANTEE agrees at all times during the term of this Agreement to have and keep in force the following insurance coverages: Limits Commercial General Liability on an occurrence basis with contractual liability coverage: General Aggregate $2,000,000 Products — Completed Operations Aggregate 2,000,000 Personal and Advertising Injury 1,500,000 Each Occurrence — Combined Bodily Injury and Property Damage 1,500,000 2. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation Statutory Employer's Liability. Bodily injury by: Accident—Each Accident 500,000 Disease — Policy Limit 500,000 Disease —Each Employee 500,000 B. An umbrella or excess policy over primary liability insurance coverages is an acceptable method to provide the required insurance limits. • (Public Space Recycling Grant - 1/2015) 4 • The above establishes minimum insurance requirements. It is the sole responsibility of GRANTEE to determine the need for and to procure additional insurance which may be needed in connection with this Agreement. Upon written request, GRANTEE shall promptly submit copies of insurance policies to the COUNTY. GRANTEE shall not commence work until it has obtained required insurance and filed with the COUNTY a properly executed Certificate of Insurance establishing compliance. C. Duty to Notify. GRANTEE shall promptly notify the COUNTY of any claim, action, cause of action or litigation brought against GRANTEE, its employees, officers, agents or subcontractors, which arises out of the provisions contained in this Agreement. 7. DATA PRACTICES GRANTEE, its officers, agents, owners, partners, employees, volunteers and subcontractors shall abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 ( MGDPA), the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and implementing regulations, if applicable, and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules, regulations and orders relating to data privacy or . confidentiality. If GRANTEE creates, collects, receives, stores, uses, maintains or disseminates data because it performs functions of the COUNTY pursuant to this Agreement, then GRANTEE must comply with the requirements of the MGDPA as if it were a government entity, and may be held liable under the MGDPA for noncompliance. GRANTEE agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from any claims resulting from GRANTEE's officers', agents', owners', partners', employees', volunteers', assignees' or subcontractors' unlawful disclosure and /or use of such protected data, or other noncompliance with the requirements of this section. GRANTEE agrees to promptly notify the COUNTY if it becomes aware of any potential claims, or facts giving rise to . such claims, under the MGDPA. The terms of this section shall survive the cancellation or termination of this Agreement. C RECORDS — AVAILABILITY /ACCESS Subject to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05, Subd. 5, GRANTEE agrees that the COUNTY, the State Auditor, or any of their authorized representatives, at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe-any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of GRANTEE and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. GRANTEE shall maintain these materials and allow access during the period of this Agreement and for six (6) years after its termination or cancellation. (Public Space Recycling Grant — 1/2015) • 9. SUCCESSORS SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENTS A. GRANTEE binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the COUNTY for all covenants, agreements and obligations contained in the contract documents. B. GRANTEE shall not assign, transfer or pledge this Agreement and/or the services to be performed, whether in whole or in part, nor assign any monies due or to become due to it without the prior written consent of the COUNTY. A consent to assign shall be subject to such conditions and provisions as the COUNTY may deem necessary, accomplished by execution of a form prepared by the COUNTY and signed by GRANTEE, the assignee and the COUNTY. Permission to assign, however, shall under no circumstances relieve GRANTEE of its liabilities and obligations under the Agreement. C. GRANTEE shall not subcontract this Agreement and /or the services to be performed, whether in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the COUNTY. Permission to subcontract, however, shall under no circumstances relieve GRANTEE of its liabilities and obligations under the Agreement. Further, GRANTEE shall be fully responsible for the acts, omissions, and failure of its subcontractors in the performance of the specified contractual services, and of . person(s) directly or indirectly employed by subcontractors. Contracts between GRANTEE and each subcontractor shall require that the subcontractor's services be performed in accordance with the terms and conditions specified. GRANTEE shall make contracts between GRANTEE and subcontractors available upon request. 10. MERGER AND MODIFICATION A. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter. All items that are referenced or that are attached are incorporated and made a part of this Agreement. If there is any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and referenced or attached items, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. B. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties. • (Public Space Recycling Grant — 1/2015) 0 11. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION A. If GRANTEE fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement or so fails to administer the work as to endanger the performance of the Agreement, it shall be in default. Unless GRANTEE's default is excused by the COUNTY, the COUNTY may upon written notice immediately cancel this Agreement in its entirety. Additionally, failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall be just cause for the COUNTY to delay payment until GRANTEE's compliance. In the event of a decision to withhold payment, the COUNTY shall furnish prior written notice to GRANTEE. B. Upon cancellation or termination of this Agreement, the GRANTEE shall itemize any and all Incentive Fund expenditures up to the date of cancellation or termination and return any Incentive Funds not yet expended. C. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, GRANTEE shall remain liable to the COUNTY for damages sustained by the COUNTY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by GRANTEE. Upon notice to GRANTEE of the claimed breach and the amount of the claimed damage, the COUNTY may withhold any payments to GRANTEE for the purpose of set -off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the COUNTY from GRANTEE is determined. Following notice from the COUNTY of the claimed breach and damage, GRANTEE and the COUNTY shall attempt to resolve the is dispute in good faith. D. The above remedies shall be in addition to any other right or remedy available to the COUNTY under this Agreement, law, statute, rule, and/or equity. E. The COUNTY's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or waiver of the same; unless consented to in writing. Such consent shall not constitute a general waiver or relinquishment throughout the entire term of the Agreement. F. This Agreement may be canceled with or without cause by either party upon thirty (30) day written notice. G. COUNTY may upon written notice immediately cancel or terminate this Agreement in the event funding for this Project is withdrawn, frozen or otherwise made unavailable, in the sole discretion of the COUNTY. COUNTY is not obligated to further fund the Project after notice and effective date of termination. 12. SURVIVAL OF PROVISIONS • (Public Space Recycling Grant — 1/2015) 7 Provisions that by their nature are intended to survive the term, cancellation or termination of this Agreement include but are not limited to: SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED (as to ownership of property); INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR; INDEMNIFICATION; INSURANCE; DATA PRACTICES; RECORDS - AVAILABILITY /ACCESS; DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION; PROMOTIONAL LITERATURE; and MINNESOTA LAW GOVERNS. 13. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION In order to coordinate the services of GRANTEE with the activities of the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services so as to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement, Dave McNary, Solid Waste Division Manager or successor (Contract Administrator), shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the COUNTY and serve as liaison between the COUNTY and GRANTEE. , who can be contacted at xxx- xxx -xxxx and @.corn , shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the GRANTEE. GRANTEE may replace such person but shall immediately give written notice to the COUNTY of the name, phone number and email address of such substitute person and of any other subsequent substitute person. 14. COMPLIANCE AND NON - DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION • A. GRANTEE shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local statutes, regulations, rules and ordinances currently in force or later enacted. B. GRANTEE shall comply with all applicable conditions of the specific referenced grant. C. GRANTEE certifies that it is not prohibited from doing business with either the federal government or the State of Minnesota as a result of debarment or suspension proceedings. 15. NOTICES Any notice or demand which must be given or made by a party under this Agreement or any statute or ordinance shall be in writing, and shall be sent registered or certified mail. Notices to the COUNTY shall be sent to the County Administrator with a copy to the originating Department at the address given in the opening paragraph of the Agreement. Notice to GRANTEE shall be sent to the address stated in the opening paragraph of the Agreement. • (Public Space Recycling Grant — 1!2015) 8 • 16. PROMOTIONAL LITERATURE GRANTEE agrees, to the extent applicable, to abide by the current Hennepin County Communications Policy (available upon request). This obligation includes, but is not limited to, GRANTEE not using the term "Hennepin County" or any derivative in any promotional literature, advertisements of any type or form or client lists without the express prior written consent of a COUNTY Department Director or equivalent. 17. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations between the parties and their performance. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation will be those courts located within the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the parties will be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions-will not be affected. • THIS PORTION OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • (Public Space Recycling Grant — 1/2015) 9 • Reviewed by the County Attorney's Office COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA Contract No: A142800 By: By: Assistant County Attorney David Hough, County Administrator Date: Date: By: Assistant County Administrator - Public Works Date: Recommended for Approval By: • Department Director of Environmental Services Date: L GRANTEE, (City of Edina) GRANTEE warrants that the person who executed this Agreement is authorized to do so on behalf of GRANTEE as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances *. By: By: Printed Name: Printed Name: Printed Title: Printed Title: Date: Date: * GRANTEE shall submit applicable documentation (articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances) that confirms the signatory's delegation of authority. This documentation shall be submitted at the time GRANTEE returns the Agreement to the COUNTY. (Public Space Recycling Grant - 1/2015) 11 I To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner o e • '���RPORAT�'9 • iaea Agenda Item #: IV. N. Action ❑x Discussion ❑ Date: May 19, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Resolution No. 2015 -53 Authorizing Support for the Blake Road Corridor Study Action Requested: Adopt the attached resolution. Information / Background: On Aug. 19, 2014 WSB & Associates provided Council with an update of the Blake Road Corridor Study, which is led by the City of Hopkins in conjunction with Hennepin County and the Cities of Edina and St. • Louis Park. At that time Council commented on and provided feedback regarding the early stages of the project. The Final Report is now complete, and the project team is requesting that Council review the recommendations and support the Study. The purpose of the Study is to identify and plan for transportation improvements needed to support construction of the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) line. The study area extends from 36th Street in St. Louis Park to Interlachen Boulevard in Edina. The study has included participation from the agencies listed above as well as Three Rivers Park District, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and with Southwest LRT Project Office. The study is guided by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) with representatives from each of the partner agencies listed above. Several different factors and goals served as both the basis for determining options and also in the scoring of the various options in the evaluation process. Considerations for traffic operations, safety, pedestrian and bicycle comfort, access, construction impacts, economic development potential, environmental impacts, cost, and long term maintenance all played a role. Note that in the portion of the study area that most directly relates to the City of Edina — Blake Road between Interlachen Blvd and Excelsior Blvd — the road section is recommended to remain a two -lane section with on -road bike lanes. A sidewalk is recommended to be added on the west side of the roadway from Maloney Avenue to Excelsior Boulevard. The Sidewalk Facilities Map in Edina's Comprehensive Plan also indicates a future sidewalk in this area. City of Edina 4801 W. 501h St. , Edina, MN 55424 C A r 1 LJ REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Project Schedule Hopkins City Council accepts Blake Road Corridor Study May 19, 2015 Hopkins enters into County cooperative agreement Summer 2015 Select project design consultant Summer 2015 Environmental Process Fall 2015 — Spring 2016 Property Acquisition Spring 2016 — Fall 2017 Private Utility Relocation Spring 2017 — Fall 2017 Complete Construction Plans Fall 2017 Begin Construction Complete Construction Spring 2018 Fall 2019 The Blake Road Corridor Study team is asking Council to adopt the attached resolution, supporting the recommendations of the Final Report. The Executive Summary of the Report is attached here for your review. Attachments: Resolution No. 2015 -53 Blake Road Corridor Final Report — Executive Summary Page 2 G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV \PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \A256 Blake Rd Corridor Study \Item IV. N. Resolution No. 2015 -53 Supporting the Blake Road Corridor Study.docx L� C� RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -53 Authorizing Support for the Blake Road Corridor Study WHEREAS, the City of Hopkins, City of Edina, City of St. Louis Park, and Hennepin County have partnered to analyze the current and future needs of Blake Road; and, WHEREAS, the study area along Blake Road extends from Interlachen Boulevard in Edina to north of State Trunk Highway 7 into St. Louis Park; and, WHEREAS, Blake Road is County State Aid Highway No. 20 between Excelsior Boulevard (County State Aid Highway No. 3) and State Trunk Highway 7; and, WHEREAS, recommendations for the improvement of Blake Road have been made and are contained in the Blake Road Corridor Study Final Report; and, WHEREAS, the recommendations of the Blake Road Corridor Study will be used as the basis of design for future improvement and reconstruction of Blake Road; and, WHEREAS, the recommendations of the Blake Road Corridor Study improve multimodal access to and from the future Southwest Light Rail Transit line for residents of the City of Edina. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Edina endorses the recommendations of the Blake Road Corridor Study. Dated: May 19, 2015 Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor 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 May 19, 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 20 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 City Clerk E • 5/13/2015 Blake Road Corridor Study Final Report <jJ' CiLy of Hopkins St. Louis Park M I N N E 5 0 T A • f Blake Road Corridor Study Final Blake Road Corridor Study Final Report Executive Summary Purpose of study The Blake Road corridor is expected to experience significant change over the next 20 years. A major catalyst for this change will be the opening of the Green Line Extension (Southwest LRT) and construction of a station at Blake Road. The LRT line is expected to open in 2019. In recognition of this change, the City of Hopkins and its partners initiated the Blake Road Corridor Study to address opportunities to: • Provide better transportation opportunities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and bus transit users • Provide better connections and access to the planned light rail station at Blake Road for all modes • Provide better connections and access to adjacent neighborhoods, commercial nodes, schools, and recreational facilities • Provide transportation infrastructure to support redevelopment in and near the corridor • that will enhance economic growth, community connectivity, and residential diversity. As part of the study, the project team analyzed existing and future conditions, developed alternatives to improve conditions in the corridor, evaluated alternatives, and recommended a design concept for transportation improvements in the corridor. The public and affected agencies were involved throughout the study process. Study area The project study area includes Blake Road between Interlachen Boulevard to Trunk Highway (TH) 7 and Aquila Avenue between TH 7 and 36th Street. Figure ii shows the location of the study area. The study corridor spans three cities: Edina ( Interlachen Boulevard to Spruce Road), Hopkins (Spruce Road to TH 7), and St. Louis Park (TH 7 to 36th Street). While the name of the street changes at TH 7, the study area is referred to as the Blake Road Corridor for the purpose of this study. Study participants The study was led by the City of Hopkins and guided by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) with representatives from the following agencies: • City of Hopkins • City of Edina • City of St. Louis Park • Hennepin County • • SWLRT Project Office • Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) • Three Rivers Park District • Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) 19 C: s t ; t- t q 1 g y I �PiRit � � Vii" ��✓ ".f 3 s vanon t .t Ubo Y ,t" z • LEGEND Bituminous Path Existing Regional Trail - On Street Bike Lane Railroad Project Study Area Existing Sidewalks - -- Proposed Trail -Municipal Boundary - "" - SWLRT Blake Road Corridor Study Figure i [:Study Area Blake Road Corridor Study Final Report • Study goals Early in the study process, the TAC developed study goals to guide the development and evaluation of alternatives for the Blake Road Corridor. The goals of the study included the following: • Facilitate access to the future Southwest LRT Blake Road station • Create a roadway that is comfortable, safe, and functional for all transportation modes: pedestrian, bicycle, motor vehicle, freight, and transit • Support redevelopment and make the roadway a place that is comfortable and active • Protect and enhance natural resources near the roadway including Minnehaha Creek • Improve connections between the roadway and nearby neighborhoods, parks, and trails • Improve connections to Minnehaha Creek and nearby trails Public involvement The public involvement process included open houses, neighborhood meetings, a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and meetings with elected officials. Three open house meetings were held as part of the planning process. Notice of each open house was posted on city websites and mailed to residents and property owners along the corridor. Input from each meeting was documented and provided to the TAC. The project team reached out to neighborhood residents and property owners through • additional meetings and attendance at events. Project staff attended an event in Cottageville Park, met with Westside Village Apartments management and residents, and met with representatives from the Blake Road Corridor Collaborative and the Blake School. Throughout the project, the City of Hopkins maintained a project webpage for the Blake Road Corridor Study. The webpage listed meeting announcements and materials from each open house. Edina and St. Louis Park also posted meeting announcements on their city websites. A TAC was convened at the beginning of the project to ensure that all interested agency stakeholders were involved in the study process. The TAC was composed of staff from the agency partners listed under Study Participants. The TAC met monthly to guide the study process, review and discuss technical analyses, provide direction on alternatives development and evaluation, and work together to determine the preferred alternative. The project team presented study progress to elected officials at several stages during the project. Staff provided updates at Edina, St. Louis Park, and Hopkins City Council Work Sessions in August and September 2014. Staff also presented the preferred alternative at an April 14, 2015 Hopkins City Council Work Session. Evaluation Process The project team developed several alternatives to address the goals of the project. These alternatives addressed roadway width and number of lanes, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, pedestrian crossings, and intersection design. The alternatives were evaluated based on the • following criteria: iii • Blake Road Corridor Study Final Report • Traffic operations: Ability to provide sufficient capacity for the existing and • forecast volumes on Blake Road and cross streets. • Safety and conflict points: Ability to reduce crashes on Blake Road and minimize conflict points between corridor users. • Pedestrian and bicycle crossings - delay, safety, and directness: Measure of the distance of pedestrian and bicycle crossings, safety of crossings, and ability to directly link pedestrians and bicyclists to destinations in the corridor. • Bicycle facility safety and comfort for likely users: Ability for the bicycle facility to be comfortable and safe for a wide range of bicyclists. • Pedestrian safety and comfort: Measure of the amount of separation the facility provides between pedestrians, vehicles, and bicyclists. • Business /Residential Access: Measure of how many vehicle movements are preserved to and from businesses and residences on Blake Road. • Right of way impacts — Roadway cross - section width: Measure of how much right of way impacts are anticipated. • Economic development: Related to right of way impacts, access, traffic operations, and bicycle and pedestrian enhancements. • Construction cost: Estimated construction cost based on width of roadway. • Maintenance costs and ease of maintenance: Measure of how easily the bicycle and pedestrian facilities can be maintained. • Environmental: Ability to minimize and enhance environmental impacts adjacent to the roadway. Recommendations The evaluation of alternatives led to the following recommendations for the corridor. These recommendations are broken out by segment. Interlachen to Excelsior Boulevard Figure i2 shows the preferred alternative for Interlachen to Excelsior Boulevard. The recommended cross - section in this segment has two lanes with on -road bike lanes and sidewalk on the west side. The primary improvement in this section is the addition of a sidewalk on the west side of Blake Road. The sidewalk would provide a facility for pedestrians from the residential areas south of Excelsior Boulevard, and provide connection to Excelsior Boulevard, the future Blake Road LRT station and other areas on Blake Road north of Excelsior Boulevard. It is recommended to maintain the existing bike lanes on Blake Road south of Excelsior Boulevard. Existing and projected traffic volumes are low enough that the bike lane will continue to be a comfortable facility for many bicyclists. Excelsior Boulevard to TH 7 Figure ig shows the preferred alternative for Blake Road between Excelsior Boulevard and TH 7. The recommended cross - section in this segment is a four lane divided roadway with multi -use • iv 0 Belmore Ln Maloney Ave 66' Goodrich St EXIST R/W 3' 6' I 6' I 6' I 12' I 12' 1 6' 15' 5- i� dewalk Blvd r Exist h Thru Lane Thru Lane 'h Exist Boulevard 1 Bike Lane Bike Lane 0 ILEGEND I O Proposed Greenspace O Proposed Roadway C Proposed Walls / Medians / Curb Proposed Multiuse Trail O Proposed Bike Lane Proposed Walk Proposed Bridge 1 e Proposed Traffic Directional Arrows _ Proposed Crosswalk Proposed Signal Access Closed Figure i2: Preferred Alternative between Blake Road Corridor Study Interlachen and Excelsior Boulevards • 0 # 44t Existing Right of Way Varies 85' to 95' —_ Figure i3: Preferred Alternative between Blake Road Corridor Study Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 7 LEGEND Proposed Greenspace Proposed Roadway Proposed Walls / Medians J Curb Proposed Multiuse Trail Proposed Bike Lane 9`, O Proposed Walk O Proposed Bridge f t r Proposed Traffic Directional Arrows .�. _ Proposed Crosswalk Proposed Signal 1' Access Closed 105.86' 23.33' 59.20' 23.33' Existing Right of Way Varies 85' to 95' —_ Figure i3: Preferred Alternative between Blake Road Corridor Study Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 7 Blake Road Corridor Study Final Report Is trail on both sides of Blake Road. The io foot multi -use path on both sides of Blake Road will be a combined facility for bikes and pedestrians. Landscape and hardscape treatments were considered in this section during the evaluation phase to make sure that adequate space was provided to accommodate the urban design treatments that will create a friendly environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. Design and treatments along the boulevard and the multi -use trail will be developed further during the final design phase of this project. It is also recommended that the City of Hopkins consider zoning requirements for a green buffer strip between the multi -use trail and the adjacent properties to enhance the bicycle and pedestrian corridor and separate it from adjacent parking lots and buildings. It is also recommended that the overhead power lines in the corridor be put underground to further enhance the pedestrian and bicycle corridor. Detailed consideration was given to pedestrian crossings and intersections in the corridor. Intersection and crossing recommendations are summarized below: • Excelsior Boulevard intersection: Recommendation to provide two southbound left turn lanes to provide adequate storage between the median opening at the West Side Village access and Excelsior Boulevard. Combined through and right -turn lanes on southbound Blake Road and northbound Blake Road are recommended in order to minimize crossing distance on Blake Road at the intersection. • Median Opening at West Side Village Access: Full access recommended at this • location to support existing development and future redevelopment. • Pedestrian Crossing between Excelsior Boulevard and Railroad Tracks: A marked pedestrian crossing with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) is recommended north of the West Side Village Access where there is a full width median. • Cedar Lake Trail Crossing: Three Rivers Park District is proposing a grade separation at the Cedar Lake Trail crossing of Blake Road. It is recommended that no marked at grade crossing be provided where the Cedar Lake trail intersects with the Blake Road multi -use trail. • 2nd Street Intersection: A signalized intersection is recommended. The 2nd Street signal will be interconnected with the railroad signal to avoid trapping vehicles on the LRT /railroad tracks. • Lake Street Intersection: Side - street stop control is recommended. A marked pedestrian crossing with RRFB is recommended on the north side of the intersection. • Minnehaha Creek Bridge: It is recommended that the Minnehaha Creek Bridge be retained. • Oxford Street: It is recommended that the median extend through the intersection of Oxford Street and Blake Road. Oxford Street would have right in and right out access on Blake Road. Businesses on the west side of Blake Road would also have right in and right out access. • Cambridge Street: No change in the lane configuration or traffic control is proposed at this intersection. The intersection of Cambridge Street and Blake Road will be • signalized. vii • Blake Road Corridor Study Final Report • TH 7: The intersection of Blake Road /Aquila Avenue and TH 7 is recommended to be modified to add a second left turn lane for northbound left turns on Blake Road and southbound left turns on Aquila Avenue. In addition the southbound free right on Aquila Avenue will be modified so that right -turns are made closer to TH 7. Modification of the southbound free right will be completed as part of a separate MnDOT project. A right -turn lane will be added for southbound right turns. It is recommended that the radius on all corners of the intersection be reduced to reduce right turn speeds and minimize pedestrian crossing distances. TH 7 to 36th Street Figure i4 shows the preferred alternative for Aquila Avenue between TH 7 and 36th Street. The recommended cross - section in this segment is a four -lane divided roadway with multi -use trail on both sides of Aquila Avenue. The roadway section in this segment will have a minimum 4 median at left turn lanes, io.8 foot through lanes, a 4 foot median, a 7 foot boulevard and a 8 foot trail. This section will require acquisition of some right of way. No specific recommendations have been made regarding landscape or hardscape in this section The 36th Street intersection is recommended to be signalized and will have the same lane . configuration as the current intersection. The 37th Street intersection is currently signalized. A roundabout was considered as an alternative at this intersection. The City of St. Louis Park will continue to evaluate both alternatives for this intersection. • Cost Estimate The estimated construction costs for the improvements are approximately $11.7 million in current dollars (2015). A 20% contingency is included in the construction costs. The estimate includes approximately $2.3 million for engineering and administration costs. The estimate does not currently include any costs for city utilities, undergrounding the overhead power lines or for right -of -way. The estimated construction costs are based on conceptual design and will change as more detail design is completed. Next Steps The recommendations in this study represent a concept design for the corridor that addresses the goals of the various stakeholders. There is significant additional design that is required before final costs and right of way can be determined. Additional study is needed of the utilities in the corridor to determine what should be replaced and the location for the utilities. As indicated earlier more detail also needs to be developed for the urban design elements of the corridor. The next step in the engineering process is to complete final design for the corridor which will help establish final construction limits and right of way needs. Environmental Review This project is subject to state environmental regulations and potentially subject to federal environmental regulations depending on the funding sources. Either a Project Memo or Environmental Assessment would be required if the project receives federal funding. It is • recommended that a state EAW be completed for the project. viii • r 1 wil Sr LEGEND 0 Proposed Greenspace M Proposed Roadway C3 Proposed Wells ? Medians I Carb Ll I Proposed Multiuse Trail =) Proposed Bike Lane Proposed Walk Q Proposed Bridge 1e Proposed TratSc Directional Arrows Proposed Crosswalk Proposed sprat Access Closed � 1 a 8 7' 12 10.8' 10.8' 10' 4' 10.8' l 10.8' 12-1 7 8' I Multipurpose Buffer Thru/Turn Lane Thru Lane Turn Lane Median Thru Lane Thru/Turn Lane Buffer Multipurpose Trail Trail Existing Right -of -Way Varies 75' to 129' Blake Road Corridor Study Figure i4: Preferred Alternative between Highway 7 and 36th Street Blake Road Corridor Study Final Report Funding Sources A variety of funding sources will be utilized to construct this project. Local funding sources could include: • City of Hopkins: Local utilities and undergrounding of overhead utilities on Blake Road between Excelsior Boulevard and TH 7 • City of St. Louis Park: Aquila Avenue Improvements • City of Edina: Sidewalk improvements in Edina • Hennepin County: Blake Road between Excelsior Boulevard and TH 7 • MnDOT: TH 7 intersection — Potentially Cooperative Agreement Funds In addition, federal funding sources will be pursued and could include: • TIGER Grant: Federal funding for multi -modal transportation projects that generate economic development and improve access to reliable, safe, and affordable transportation. The minimum federal funding per project is $10 million. • Transportation Alternatives Program: Federal funds administered through the Metropolitan Council that could be used for multi -use trail and aesthetic enhancements. Coordination with other projects The design of this project needs to be coordinated with several other projects that will be • designed and potentially constructed in the same time frame. This includes: • Southwest LRT and Blake Road Station Area • Cedar Lake Regional Trail grade separation • Cold Storage Site Development Plans • Highway 7 intersection improvements • City of Hopkins local street reconstruction • x• �91riA, lV o e {� • ,^CORPOAATE� lae8 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: IV-0. From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Action M Discussion ❑ Date: May 19, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regarding Lot Division Procedures, Rezoning Procedures, Side Yard Setback Regulations and R -2 Regulations, Ordinance No. 2015 -07 Action Requested: Second reading of the attached Ordinance No. 2015 -07. Information / Background: Staff has made the changes that were suggested by the City Council, and drafted by the city attorney regarding the definition of a window well. Further regulation of window wells in regard to window well depth (width) and setbacks, and building site work containment, will be added to the list of Ordinance considerations on the Planning Commission work plan. ATTACHMENTS: • Ordinance No. 2015 -07 • May 6, 2015 Council memo summarizing the Ordinance. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 ORDINANCE NO. 2 015 - 07 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 32 • AND 36 OF THE EDINA CITY CODE The City Council Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Section 32 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 32 -6. Plat riot required. (a) Double dwelling units. As ^r^„ided in seetmen 2' iQ(a), No plat shall be required for subdivisions of lots in Double Dwelling Unit Districts but only a leidiv-ision Party wall division pursuant to subsection (c) of this section shall be required. (b) Lot division Lot line adjustment. No plat shall be required for any lei d+visien adjustment which adjusts or relocates a common lot line separating two lots and which does not create a new undeveloped parcel, tract or lot that complies, alone or in combination with one or more other parcels, tracts or lots, with the applicable minimum lot area and other requirements of this chapter and section. Heweyer, before , lot division shall be made or any conveyance division 3 of this chapter, e pt th , t ON1z A ilotice of the hearing before thre -c need ed not be published; (2) No sign need be erected; and (c) Procedure. Lot line adjustments may be approved by the city planner if the following conditions are met: (1) Lot Line Adjustment Conditions. The new legal descriptions for the properties are metes and bounds; The adjustment does not result in the creation of a new lot , does not make one of the lots large enough to be eligible for further subdivision, and does not make an unbuildable lot buildable; and C. The resulting parcels meet all applicable ordinance requirements, except that if one of the parcels was previously non - conforming, it must become • more conforming as a result of the subdivision. Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX (2) Party Wall Division Conditions. • a. The new legal descriptions for the properties are metes and bounds; b. The multi - family building is already built; C. The lot line(s) is along an existing, common wall; d. The division does not make one of the lots large enough to be eligible for further subdivision; e. Verification has been provided that the building would meet building code requirements with the new lot line; f. The following items are submitted for review by the city attorney, who will designate which items must be recorded: 1. Documents establishing how the building, common sewer and water lines and any common drives will be maintained and who will be responsible; and 2. Common access easements for each lot. (3) Application Process. a. An application to adjust a lot line between two existing lots or divide a lot along an existing party wall(s) of a multi - family building must submitted to the planning division. The application must be accompanied by all of the following: 1. An application fee. 2. A full legal description of the existing properties, as documented by current land title records. 3. An existing conditions survey. The survey must include: lot dimensions, all platted and recorded easements, all existing structures with dimensions to show size and location, structure setbacks from all property lines, and the location of existing driveways and utility lines. 4. A proposed conditions survey. The survey must include: the proposed lot lines, all platted, recorded, and proposed easements, all existing structures with dimensions to show size and location, structure setbacks from all property lines, and the location of existing driveways and utility lines. 5. Evidence of the current condition of title to the land affected by the lot line adjustment, which may include an abstract of title or registered property abstract or a commitment for an owner's policy of Existing text — XXXX 2 Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX title insurance. The city attorney may require the applicant to also provide copies of recorded instruments that are referenced in the submitted title evidence. • b. After receipt of the application, the city planner will consider the subdivision's consistency with this ordinance. Section 2. Sec. 36 -10, Definitions is amended to add the following definition: Window well means the space maintained below a below grade window and the surrounding soil. Required setback for window wells shall be measured from the outer edge of the supporting structure of the window well. Section 3. Sec. 36 -130, Plan Modifications is amended to read as follows: Sec. 36 -130. - Plan modifications. (a) Minor changes may be authorized by the planner only one time. Changes are considered minor if: (1) There is no increase to the proposed number of dwelling units; (2) Any proposed increase in the floor area of structures on site does not exceed five percent of the gross floor area; (3) All proposed revisions comply with Code requirements; (4) There is no change to any condition required in a site plan approval, including building materials and color; a+�d (5) The property is not located in an Edina Heritage Landmark District; (6) Impervious surface does not increase by more than five percent, unless to add required parking stalls to comply with a proof of parking plan; (7) There is no change to on -site circulation patterns or access to the site; and (8) Trees to be planted as part of the approved site plan may be relocated but not decreased in number. (b) All other plan modifications shall be acted on, reviewed and processed by the commission and council in the same manner as they reviewed and processed the site plan. Section 4. Chapter 36. Article IV. Subdivision II, procedure for rezoning in the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Subdivision II. - Procedure for Rezoning Sec. 36 -212. °, -minwy Rezoning and site plan. The petition for rezoning shall include a ^r Fy site plan with the required data and information in article III of this chapter. Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX Sec. 36 -213. Planning commission review and hearing. is Upon receipt of the petition, fee and all other required information, in form and substance acceptable to the planner, the planner will review the petition, pFelirminaFy site plan and the other information provided by the petitioner, and forward a report to the planning commission. The commission shall conduct a public hearing regarding the petition and ^r Fy site plan. A notice of the date, time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be published in the official newspaper of the city at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing. A similar notice of hearing shall be mailed at least ten days before the date of the hearing to each owner of property situated, wholly or partly, within 1,000 feet of the tract to which the petition relates, insofar as the names and addresses of such owners can reasonably be determined by the clerk from records maintained by the assessor or from other appropriate records. After reviewing the report of the planner and hearing the oral or written views of all interested persons, the commission shall make its decision at the same meeting or at a specified future date and send its recommendation to the council. No new notice need be given for hearings that are continued by the commission to a specified future date. The commission may recommend approval by the council based upon, but not limited to, the following factors: (1) Is consistent with the comprehensive plan; (2) Will not be detrimental to properties surrounding the tract; 0 (3) Will not result in an overly intensive land use; (4) Will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards; (5) Conforms to the provisions of this section and other applicable provisions of this Code; and (6) Provides a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. Sec. 36 -214. Council hearings and decision; rF;T zoning approval. Upon request of the .,l-,. neF city FnanageF pet;tiene and After review and recommendation by the planning commission, the city council shall conduct a public hearing regarding the rezoning petition and ^r y site plan. A notice of the date, time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be published in the official newspaper of the city at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing. A similar notice of hearing shall be mailed at least ten days before the date of the hearing to each owner of property situated, wholly or partly, within 1,000 feet of the tract to which the petition relates, insofar as the names and addresses of such owners can reasonably be determined by the clerk from records maintained by the assessor or from other appropriate records. After hearing the oral or written views of all interested persons, the council shall make its decision at the same meeting or at a specified future date. No new notice need be given for hearings that are continued by the council to a specified future date. An affirmative vote of three -fifths of all members of the council shall be required to grant preliminary rezoning approval. Provided, however, a rezoning from any residential zoning district to any nonresidential zoning district shall require an affirmative Existing text — XXXX 4 Stricken text —XXXX Added text —XXXX vote of four - fifths of all members of the council. If preliminary rezening appFoval is granted, the petitioner may pFepare a final site plan. In granting preliminary rezoning approval, the council may make modifications to the pFeliminaFy site plan and may impose conditions on its approval of the • site plan. The petitieneF shall include the modifications, and eomply with the cenditions, On the final site plan, or at anotheF time and by other documents, as the council may requiFe OF as shall be apprepFiate. See. 36 21-6. - Final rezening and site plan; planning commissien review and hearing. (a) The planner shall foFward a Feport to the planning commissioR. The commission shall Conduct a public heaFing regarding the final rezeRing and site plan. A notmee of the date, time, place and puFpose of the hearing shall he published in the official newspaper of the city at least ten days pFie to the date of the heaFing. A similar notice of hearing shall be mailed at least ten days before the date of the heaFing to each owner of pFoperty situated wholly or partly within 1,000 feet ef the tract to which the petition relates, insefar as the names and addresses of such owners c reasonably be determined by the clerk fFem records maintained by the assesser or fFem C)theF appropriate reeeFds. After reviewing the Fepert of the planner and heaFiRg the Gral OF written views of all iRteFested persons, the commission shall make its decisien at the same meeting E)F at a speeified future date and send its recommendation te the eouncil. Ne new notiee need be given fo heaF;ngs that are continued by the commissien to a specified future date. The eemmission may reeernmend approval by the council based upon, but not limited to, the fellewiRg factors: is consistent with the comprehensive plan; (2) is eensistent with the pFeliminary site plan as appreved and modified by the GeLincil centains the council imposed conditions te the extent the conditions ean be complied with by the final site plan. , (3) Will n„+ hn detrimental ton properties surrounding the tract 1 , (4) Wall not r o I+ in an nrl„ intensive land (5) Will nn+ r u 1+ undue traffic . estien or tFaffic hazards - (6) ConfoFms to the provisions of this seetien and other applicable provisions of this Cedej and (7) Provides a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing stFLIctUres, Open space a. nd natural feat See. 3�4:7. I^.,uneiI heaFing and decisc„r,. final r Existing text — XXXX Stricken text —X Added text — XXXX 0 Sec. 36 -218. Filing. The approved 4n-a4 site plan shall be filed in the planning department. Sec. 36 -219. Development. The development of the tract shall be done and accomplished in full compliance with the approved 4Ra4-site plan, as modified by, and with the conditions made by, the council, and in full compliance with this chapter and other applicable provisions of this Code. Applications for building permits shall be reviewed by the planning department prior to issuance of such permits to determine if they conform to the provisions of this chapter, the approved fk4t14 site plan, as modified by, and with the conditions made by, the council, and other applicable provisions of this Code. Sec. 36 -220. - Changes to approved 4na4 site plan. Minor changes in the location and placement of buildings or other improvements may be authorized by the planner. Proposed changes to the approved fh+a4 site plan affecting structural types, building coverage, mass, intensity or height, allocation of open space and all other changes which affect the overall design of the property shall be acted on, reviewed and processed by the commission and council in the same manner as they reviewed and processed the fh4w site plan, except that a three - fifths favorable vote of the council shall be required to authorize the proposed change. 0 Sec. 36 -221. Lapse of approved #hiaf site plan by nonuser; extension of time. • (a) If a building permit has not been obtained, and if erection or alteration of a building, as described in the application for fi+4a4 site plan, has not begun within two years after fi*a4 d^v;t site plan approval, the approval shall be null and void unless a petition for extension of time in which to commence the proposed work or improvements has been granted. (b) A petition for extension shall be made in writing and filed with the city clerk within such two - year period. The petition shall state reasons showing why a building permit has not been obtained, or why erection or alterations have not commenced, and shall state the additional time requested to begin the proposed work or improvement. The petition shall be presented to the council for hearing and decision in the same manner as then required for an original application. The council may grant an extension of up to one year upon finding that: (1) There is a reasonable expectation that the proposed work or improvement will commence during the extension; and (2) The facts which were the basis for approving the final development plan have not materially changed. No more than one extension shall be granted. Existing text — XXXX 6 Stricken text —X Added text — XXXX Sec. 36 -222. - Restriction on rezoning after denial of petition. After the council has denied a petition for rezoning, the owner of the tract to which the petition related may not file a new petition for a period of one year following the date of such denial for transferring the same tract, or any part, to the same district or subdistrict (if the district has been divided into subdistricts) to which such transfer was previously denied. Provided, however, that such petition may be filed if so directed by the council on a three -fifths favorable vote of all members of the council after presentation to the council of evidence of a change of facts or circumstances affecting the tract. Section 5. Section 36 -255 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 36 -255. - Procedures. (a) Preapplication conference. Prior to filing of an application for a PUD, the applicant must arrange for and attend a conference with city staff. The primary purpose of the conference shall be to provide the applicant with an opportunity to gather information and obtain guidance as to the general suitability of the proposal for the area for which it is proposed and its conformity to the provisions of this chapter before incurring substantial expense in the preparation of plans, surveys and other data. (b) Preapplication sketch plan review. Prior to filing of a PUD, the applicant is encouraged to submit a sketch plan of the project to the city planner pursuant to section 36 -126. The submittal should include a statement providing justification for the PUD, including, but not limited to, the intended utilization of the items listed in the purpose, intent and criteria in this subdivision. (c) Planning commission and city council review. The planner shall refer the sketch plan to the planning commission and city council for discussion, review and informal comment. Any opinions or comments provided to the applicant by the planner, planning commission and city council shall be considered advisory only and shall not constitute a binding decision on the request. There shall be no official application made for a sketch plan. It is an informal review and comment by planning commission and city council. (d) Preliminary development plan and preliminary rezoning. Preliminary development plan submissions may depict and outline the proposed implementation of the sketch plan for the PUD. The preliminary development plan submissions shall include, but not be limited to, the submission requirements stipulated in article III of this chapter. Preliminary rezoning process is stipulated in section 36-95 212 -214. Preliminary rezoning shall include first reading of an Ordinance Amendment creating a PUD zoning district. (e) Final development plan and final rezoning. After approval of the preliminary development plan, the applicant may apply for a final development plan and final rezoning approval for all or a portion of the PUD. The final development plan submissions shall include, but not be limited to, the submission requirements stipulated in article III of this chapter. oaf --ing ,. ecess is stipulated in seetwen 36 95 Final development plan and final rezoning shall be heard before the city council. The final development plan and final PUD is reviewed to ensure that the proposed final development plan is consistent with the preliminary development plan and to address any new or outstanding concerns from preliminary Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX approval. Should the plans be revised by the applicant beyond the allowed plan modifications outlined in section 36 -130, the final development plan and final rezoning • shall therefore follow the process outlined in section 36- 212 -214, which requires review by both planning commission and city council. (f) Final rezoning to PUD. Final rezoning to PUD becomes official upon adoption of an ordinance rezoning the property. Section 6. Section 36 -438 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 36 -438. Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height. (1) Building coverage. e. The following improvements shall be excluded when computing building coverage: 1. Driveways and sidewalks, but not patios, subject to subsection (1)d.1 of this section. 2. Parking lots and parking ramps. 3. Accessory recreational facilities not enclosed by solid walls and not covered by a roof, including outdoor swimming pools, tennis courts and shuffleboard courts. • 4. Unenclosed and uneeveFed steps and stoops less than 50 square feet. • 5. Overhanging eaves and roof projections not supported by posts or pillars. (2) Setbacks. Table is revised as follows: Minimum setbacks, (subject to the requirements of subsection Front Side Street Interior Side Street Yard 36- 439(1). St eet 1. Single dwelling unit buildings 30' ** 15' 10' 25' on lots 75 feet or more in width. The required interior yard setback of 2. Single dwelling unit buildings 5 feet shall iRGFease by third e on lots more than 60 feet in 30 15 feet (4 inches) for feet that, th 25 each let 60 feet . width, but less than 75 feet in width exceeds R width. ; shall meet the table below: Lot Width I Total Side Yard Setbacks from both Interior Side Lot Lines 74 20' with no less than 10 feet on one side 73 — J 20' with no less than 10 feet on one side 72 20' with no less than 10 feet on one side _ 71 19'4" with no less than 9 feet on one side 70 18' 8" with no less than 9 feet on one side Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text –XXXX L;1 • L Minimum setbacks, (subject to he requirements of subsection 36- 439(1). Front Street Rear Side Street Interior Side Street Ya d 69 18' with no less than 9 feet on one side 68 17'4" with no less than 8 feet on one side 67 16' 8" with no less than 8 feet on one side 66 1 16' with no less than 8 feet on one side 65 1 15'4" with no less than 7 feet on one side 64 7 14' 8" with no less than 7 feet on one side 163 1 14' with no less than 7 feet on one side 62 13'4" with no less than 6 feet on one side 61 12' 8" total with no less than 6 feet on one side if this for the inteFi9F option utilized FequiFed side yard setbaek, subseetion3:��(I)e. shall not Front Street Side Street Interior Side Yard Rear Yard 3. Single dwelling unit buildings on lots between 50 and 60 feet in width. 30' ** 15' 5' 9(!)& 25' and swbseetien3.b shall av er 12' total, with no less than S' on one side and subsection '6 4. Single dwelling unit buildings on lots less than 50 feet in width. 30' ** 15' 5' 25' 5. Buildings and structures accessory to single dwelling unit buildings: a. Detached garages, tool sheds, greenhouses and garden houses entirely within the rear yard, including the eaves. 30' ** >15' 3' 3' b. Detached garages, tool sheds, greenhouses and garden houses not entirely within the rear yard. 30' ** 15' 5' 5' c. Unenclosed decks and patios. 30' ** 15' S' S' d. Swimming pools, including appurtenant equipment and required decking. 30' ** 15' 10' 10' e. Tennis courts, basketball courts, sports courts, hockey and skating rinks, and other similar recreational accessory uses including appurtenant fencing and lighting. 30' ** 15' 5' 5' Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text —XXXX • • Minimum setbacks, (subject to he requirements of subsection 36- 439(1). Front Street Side Street Interior Side Street Rear Yard f. All other accessory buildings and structures. r I 30' ** 15' 5' S' 3' g. €gFess window wells. NA NA -mss (window wells may ^"" " h in the are exempt from the side yard NA setback requirement on one side.) �6. Other Uses: a. All conditional use buildings or structures including accessory buildings less than 1,000 square feet; except 50' 50' 50' 50' parking lots, day care facilities, pre - schools and nursery schools b. All conditional use accessory buildings 1,000 square feet or 95' 95' 95' 95' larger. c. Driving ranges, tennis courts, maintenance buildings and swimming pools accessory to a 50' 50' 50' 50' golf course. d. Daycare facilities, pre- schools and nursery schools. 30' F 35' 35' 35' ** See subsection 36- 439(1) below for required setback when more than 25 percent of the lots on one side of a street between street intersections, on one [side] of a street that ends in a cul -de -sac, or on one side of a dead end street are occupied by dwelling units. Section 7. Section 36- 439(1) of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: (1) Special setback requirements for single dwelling unit lots. a. Established front street setback. When more than 25 percent of the lots on one side of a street between street intersections, on one side of a street that ends in a cul -de- sac, or on one side of a dead -end street, are occupied by dwelling units, the front street setback for any lot shall be determined as follows: 1. If there is an existing dwelling unit on an abutting lot on only one side of the lot, the front street setback requirement shall be the same as the front street setback of the dwelling unit on the abutting lot. 2. If there are existing dwelling units on abutting lots on both sides of the lot, the front street setback shall be the average of the front street setbacks of the dwelling units on the two abutting lots. 3. In all other cases, the front street setback shall be the average front street • setback of all dwelling units on the same side of that street. Existing text — XXXX 10 Stricken text — XXX-X Added text —XXXX b. Side street setback. The required side street setback shall be increased to that required for a front street setback where there is an adjoining interior lot facing on • the same street. The required side street setback for a garage shall be increased to 20 feet if the garage opening faces the side street. BMW MEN W. N1 III c. d-. Rear yard setback, interior lots. If the rear lot line is less than 30 feet in length, or if the lot forms a point at the rear and there is no rear lot line, then, for setback purposes, the rear lot line shall be deemed to be a straight line segment within the lot not less than 30 feet in length, perpendicular to a line drawn from the midpoint of the front lot line to the junction of the interior lot lines, and at the maximum distance from the front lot line. d. e- Rear yard setback, corner lots required to maintain two front street setbacks. The owner of a corner lot required to maintain two front street setbacks may designate any interior lot line measuring 30 feet or more in length as the rear lot line for setback • purposes. In the alternative, the owner of a corner lot required to maintain two front street setbacks may deem the rear lot line to be a straight line segment within the lot not less than 30 feet in length, perpendicular to a line drawn from the junction of the street frontages to the junction of the interior lot lines, the line segment being the maximum distance from the junction of the street frontages. e. Through lots. For a through lot, the required setback for all buildings and structures from the street upon which the single dwelling unit building does not front shall be not less than 25 feet. Section 8. Sections 36 -466, and 36 -467 of the Edina City Code are amended to read as follows: Sec. 36 -466. Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height. (a) The requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height in the R -2 Double Dwelling Unit District are as follows: (1) Maximum building coverage: 25 percent. (2) Setbacks (subject to the provisions of subsection (d) of this section). • a. Principal use buildings. Existing text — XXXX 11 Stricken text —X Added text — XXXX 1. Front street setback: 30 feet. ** 2. Side street setback: 15 feet. 3. Interior side yard setback: ten feet. • 4. Rear yard setback: 35 feet. • b. Accessory buildings and structures. Setbacks for accessory buildings and structures shall be the same as those required by this chapter for building and structures accessory to single dwelling unit buildings in the R -1 district. * *See section 36- 439(1) for required setback when more than 25 percent of the lots on one side of a street between street intersections, on one side of a street that ends in a cul- de -sac, or on one side of a dead -end street are occupied by dwelling units. (3) Height: 2% stories or 38 35 feet, whichever is less. (b) The maximum height to the highest point on a roof of a double dwelling unit shall be 35 feet. The maximum height may be increased by one inch for each foot that the lot exceeds 75 feet in width. In no event shall the maximum height exceed 40 feet. Sec. 36 -467. Special requirements. (a) Generally. In addition to the general requirements described in article XII, division 2 of this chapter, the following special requirements shall apply: (1) Application of requirements. Requirements for lot area and dimensions, building coverage, setbacks and height shall be applied to the entire double dwelling unit building and the entire lot, and shall ignore any subdivision of building and lot which has been, or may be, made in order to convey each dwelling unit separately. (2) Sewer and water connections. Each dwelling unit must be separately and independently connected to public sanitary sewer and water mains, or shall have been granted a waiver thereof in accordance with article X of chapter 10 (3) Subdivided R -2 lots. A double dwelling unit building and lot may be subdivided pursuant to chapter 32 along the common party walls between the dwelling units, provided that: a. A building permit has been issued and the building foundation is in place; b. Each parcel resulting from the subdivision must have frontage on a public street of not less than 25 feet; c. The parcels resulting from the subdivision shall each comprise approximately the same number of square feet, and no individual paFeel `hall be less than 5,000 sq -uaFe -feet; and d. A rear yard not less than 25 feet in depth must be provided for each dwelling unit. Existing text — XXXX 12 Stricken text — XXXX Added text —XXXX • • Section 9. Section 36 -525 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Division 6. Planned Residence District (PRD). Sec. 36 -525. Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height. (c) Maximum building height. Section 10. Section 36 -1270 of the Edina City Code is amended to add the following: Sec. 36 -1270. - Nonconforming uses, buildings and lots. (a) Nonconforming buildings. (1) Alterations, additions and enlargements. A nonconforming building, other than a single dwelling unit building, shall not be added to or enlarged, in any manner, or subjected to an alteration involving 50 percent or more of the gross floor area of the building, or 50 percent or more of the exterior wall area of the building, unless such nonconforming building, including all additions, alterations and enlargements, shall conform to all of the restrictions of the district in which it is located. The percentage of the gross floor area or exterior wall area subjected to an alteration shall be the aggregate percentage for any consecutive three -year period. b. Alternate setbacks. An addition to a single dwelling unit building with a nonconforming setback, or an addition to a structure accessory to a single dwelling unit building with a nonconforming setback, may be constructed within the existing nonconforming setback, which is the shortest distance from the applicable lot line to the existing structure, subject to the following limitations: The addition shall not exceed the existing square footage encroachment into the nonconforming setback or 200 square feet, whichever is less; and is 2. The addition may only be constructed on the same floor as the existing encroachment into the nonconforming setback. Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text —XXXX 13 ,. 1;114 .- +„r;,,.- or 30 feet hieh,,veF is Bess See article XI, division 2 of this chapter, Building PRD -1, 2 Height Overlay District and appendix A of the city's official zoning map_______ F D See article XI, division 2 of this chapter, Building Height Overlay District and appendix A -3 of the city's official zoning map r 55 PRD See article XI, division 2 of this chapter, Building Height Overlay District and appendix A -4, o the city's official zoning map See article XI, division 2 of this chapter, Building Height Overlay District and appendix A PSR -3 of the city's official zoning map _ � FPS R-4 See article XI, division 2 of this chapter, Building Height Overlay District and appendix A of the city's official zoning map Section 10. Section 36 -1270 of the Edina City Code is amended to add the following: Sec. 36 -1270. - Nonconforming uses, buildings and lots. (a) Nonconforming buildings. (1) Alterations, additions and enlargements. A nonconforming building, other than a single dwelling unit building, shall not be added to or enlarged, in any manner, or subjected to an alteration involving 50 percent or more of the gross floor area of the building, or 50 percent or more of the exterior wall area of the building, unless such nonconforming building, including all additions, alterations and enlargements, shall conform to all of the restrictions of the district in which it is located. The percentage of the gross floor area or exterior wall area subjected to an alteration shall be the aggregate percentage for any consecutive three -year period. b. Alternate setbacks. An addition to a single dwelling unit building with a nonconforming setback, or an addition to a structure accessory to a single dwelling unit building with a nonconforming setback, may be constructed within the existing nonconforming setback, which is the shortest distance from the applicable lot line to the existing structure, subject to the following limitations: The addition shall not exceed the existing square footage encroachment into the nonconforming setback or 200 square feet, whichever is less; and is 2. The addition may only be constructed on the same floor as the existing encroachment into the nonconforming setback. Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text —XXXX 13 (2) Non conformities. Except as provided in article X of this chapter, any nonconformity, including the lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of • the adoption of an additional control under the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, may be continued, including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance or improvement, but not including expansion, except as specifically provided in this chapter, unless: a. The nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year; or Any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of greater than 50 percent of its market value and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property is damaged. In these cases, the city may impose reasonable conditions upon a building permit in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent property. Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a conforming use or occupancy. (b) Nonconforming lots. A nonconforming lot in the R -1 district used or intended for a single dwelling unit building shall be exempt from the width, depth, area and lot width to perimeter ratio requirements of this chapter, provided, that the lot: (1) Is not less than 50 feet in width; (2) Is not less than 100 feet in depth; • (3) Has at least 30 feet frontage on a street; and • (4) Has not been, at any time since October 22, 1951, held in common ownership with all or part of an adjoining or abutting lot or parcel which, together, complied with the minimum width, depth and area and lot width to perimeter ratio requirements imposed by this chapter. If such lot and adjoining or abutting lot or parcel has been held in such common ownership, then the property so held in common ownership shall be subject to the following: If a nonconforming lot or parcel is, or at any time since October 22, 1951, has been, held in common ownership with all or part of an adjoining or abutting parcel or lot which together comply with, or come close to complying with, the minimum width, depth, area, and lot width to perimeter ratio, requirements of this chapter, then such nonconforming lot or parcel and such adjoining or abutting parcel or lot shall be considered as one lot and shall not be decreased in size below such minimum requirements. b. If in a group of two or more adjoining or abutting lots or parcels owned or controlled by the same person, any single lot or parcel does not meet the full minimum depth, width, area or lot width to perimeter ratio requirements of this section, such single lot or parcel shall not be considered as a separate lot or parcel able to be conveyed and developed under this Code. Existing text — XXXX 14 Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX (c) Nonconforming lots. An existing nonconforming lot in the R -2 district used or intended for a double dwelling unit building shall be exempt from the width, depth, area and lot width to perimeter ratio requirements of this chapter provided the lot is at least 50 feet in width and has at least 30 feet of frontage on a street. Section 11. This ordinance is effective upon publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: • Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk • CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK James B. Hovland, Mayor I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2015. City Clerk Existing text — XXXX 15 Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director o e �4 t, � leess Agenda Item #: VI.B. Action Discussion ❑ Date: May 6, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: PUBLIC HEARING— Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regarding Lot Division Procedures, Rezoning Procedures, Side Yard Setback Regulations and R -2 Regulations, Ordinance No. 2015 -07 Action Requested: Grant first reading of the attached Ordinance No. 2015 -07. Information / Background: The City Council is asked to hold a public hearing on a Zoning Ordinance Amendment regarding procedures for lot divisions and rezoning; side yard setback requirements; and R -2 district regulations. The proposed Ordinance is the result of the recommendations from the Planning Commission /City Council Work Session on February 17 regarding the city's rezoning procedure. Additionally, this Ordinance includes items recommended by the City Council regarding lot divisions, and items discussed by the Planning Commission to make the Code more user friendly and understandable. The following is a summary of each of the "Sections" in the Ordinance: Section 1. Lot Division /Party Wall Division. This would allow a lot division (an adjustment to an existing lot line), and a party wall division of an existing duplex to be done administratively. The lot line adjustment cannot create a new lot, cannot make one lot large enough to be eligible for further subdivision and cannot create an unbuildable lot. The resulting parcels must meet applicable ordinances. If one lot is nonconforming, it must become more conforming. Currently, lot line adjustments (lot divisions) require review and recommendation of the Planning Commission and final action by the City Council. This can be time consuming for applicants wishing only adjust a lot line. Edina is unique in requiring this type of process. Most cities have their staff review and approve these requests. Section 2. Window Well. A definition has been added for a window well. This definition would include egress window wells. The setback regulation is now for all types of window wells. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50,h St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 Section 3. Plan Modifications. Additional detail, including impervious surface, on -site circulation and access, and landscaping has been added in regard to plan modifications following city council approval. Sections 4 & S. Procedure for Rezoning. As discussed at the City Council work session, these two Sections amend the Zoning Ordinance to create a I -step process for standard rezoning requests; and a 2- step process for PUD, Planned Unit Development rezoning requests. The second step of the PUD process would be a review by the City Council only. This final review is to ensure that the final plans are consistent with the plans approved in the first step, and also that the plans include the conditions that were required in the first step. If changes are made to the plan following the I st step, beyond what is allowed in Section 36 -30 of the Zoning Ordinance, the applicant would be required to go back again to the Planning Commission for recommendation, the same as the I st step. (See Section 3 for the detail of plan modifications.) Sections 6 & 7. Building Coverage, Side Yard Setback requirements. Adds clarity to building coverage exemptions, and the side yard setback requirements. This section proposes an elimination of the side yard setback requirement to increase the side yard setback 6 inches for every I -foot that a single family home exceeds 15 feet in height. The side yard setbacks were recently increased by generally 2 feet total on lots 50 -74 feet in width. (One foot on each side.) However, builders and homeowners could choose the option to maintain the previous setback requirements, as long as the second story setback was increased. However, since this ordinance went into effect, the vast majority of new homes are being built with the new increased setback rather than the old method. Homes that are less than 50 feet in width and over 75 feet in width are still required to meet the standard of having to increase the setback on the second story. Lots that exceed 75 feet in width are required a 10- foot side yard setback. Spacing between these homes has not been an issue in the past. Lots less than 40 feet in width struggle to build 2 -story homes giving the added second story setback requirement. Staff experiences a lot of confusion by residents and builders when they try to interpret this section of the ordinance. By eliminating the second story increased setback rule, it also eliminates the confusion on measuring building height on the side yard from proposed grade. This is confusing to many, because the overall height of a home is measured from previously existing grade along the front building line. It also eliminates the confusion over where the height of the structure is measured to. (See I .c on page I I of the proposed ordinance.) Section 8. R -2 District Regulations. This Section corrects a typo that restricts the maximum height of a duplex to be 35 feet. • Section 9. Building Height. Corrects an error on the table to refer to the height overlay map. REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 • Section 10. Nonconforming R-2 Lots. This Section allows duplexes on existing nonconforming R -2 lots to be torn down and rebuilt without the need for a variance. This would be consistent with existing R- I lots that are nonconforming. Currently, substandard R -2 lots are required lot area and width variances when structures are torn down and replaced. The text of the entire Nonconforming Lot Section has been added for context. Please note that the language suggested is the same as is used for nonconforming lots in the R- I District. • • • • • To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL From: Scott H. Neal, City Manager Date: May 19, 2015 Subject: Approve Amendment To Investment Authorization Policy o CE Cn 'y �HdR Agenda Item #: IV. P. Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Action Requested: Motion to approve proposed amendment of City's Investment Authorization Policy. Information / Background: The City Council adopted an Investment Authorization Policy by adopting Resolution 2010 -09 on January 5, 2010. Section 12 of the policy authorizes a staff investment advisory committee to conduct a quarterly review of the Finance Director's investment activities. The current policy defines the investment advisory committee to consist of "...City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Assistant Finance Director, and the Park Director... ". The investment advisory committee has kept regular meetings over the years, but schedule conflicts and personnel changes have frequently interfered with its operations. In order to keep the City's commitment to regular and rigorous internal review of the investment policy and activities, I propose the Council amend the relevant part of Section 12 as follows: Current: The Finance Director and the investment advisory committee made up of the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, the Assistant Finance Director and the Park Director will review the information and make and proposed modifications. Proposed: The Finance Director shall report the City's investment performance and activities to an internal investment advisory committee composed of the City Manager, Finance Director and up to five additional City employees appointed by the City Manager for the purposes of internal control and risk management City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 �0 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # 1VJ From: John Wallin Consent ❑ Finance Director Information Only ❑ Date: January 5, 2010 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Investment Authorization Action ❑ Motion And Policy ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2010 -9 authorizing investment agreement and approve Statement of Investment Policy. Info /Background: The City's Resolution Authorizing Investment Agreement is used by banks and brokerages to open new accounts such as each time a new bond construction fund is opened. The last time the City adopted this resolution was August 2005. The attached resolution is the same resolution as the one adopted in 2005 but will update the date to one more recent. The Statement of Investment Policy has been reviewed by myself and the investment advisory committee and changes made from the last one adopted in 2007. The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) members, as presented at the GFOA fall conference, have updated some of their recommended policy wording. The attached policy represents many of those recommendations including the following: • The policy statement (paragraph 1) was expanded adding the last 4 sentences. Paragraphs covering liquidity (paragraph 4.13) and return of investment (paragraph 4.C) were added to the policy. Liquidity is to ensure that the city is always able to meet all operating requirements. Return on investment further defines the investment objective of attaining a market rate of return considering the City's conservative investment portfolio. • A paragraph concerning ethics and conflicts of interest (paragraph 5) was expanded from a sentence under the standards paragraph. • The section concerning guaranteed investment contract (paragraph 6.G) was rewritten to update the wording. • The section on highly sensitive investments that the City will not purchase (paragraph 6.1) was expanded by further defining the types of investments. Two investments included as highly sensitive in the 2007 policy are not part of the latest GFOA highly sensitive investments recommendation and are not considered highly sensitive investments in Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement 40 where the GFOA recommendation comes from. Index amortizing notes and step -up notes and bonds are often used by cities especially with these ultra low interest rates. As interest rates again head higher these two types of variable rate investments will have interest rates that also go up reducing interest rate risk. These two investments are not highly sensitive and should not have been included under this section. • A new section was added on internal controls (paragraph 10) and will tie to procedures in the internal control manual. • A new section was added on performance standards (paragraph 11) to again state the city's objectives addressing safety, liquidity and yield. • Other more minor changes were made to update other wording of the policy. • RESOLUTION NO. 2010-9 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INVESTMENT AGREEMENT BE IT RESOLVED, that Gordon Hughes and/or John Wallin who is /are Officer's of the City of Edina, is /are authorized to enter into agreements or commitments to open, maintain and close accounts with banks, brokers and other financial institutions with which it does business, and are authorized to sign on individual bank and broker accounts and such Officers are further authorized to cancel such authority, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that John Wallin and/or Eric Roggeman is/are authorized to purchase or sell any and all securities as authorized by the City of Edina's Investment Policy (as attached), and that the Officer is authorized on behalf of the City of Edina to sign any necessary documentation: to give written or oral instructions with respect to said transactions: to obligate the City for the carrying out of any contract, agreement, or transaction; to pay by check or wire; and to take any and all such actions in the name of and on behalf of said City that would be considered desirable and necessary with respect to said transaction; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bank, broker or other financial institution may rely upon the actions of the Officer as the City of Edina representative that any and all securities purchased are legal and authorized investments under the City's applicable policies and/or statutory requirements. The City of Edina represents that it will provide these applicable policies and/or statutory requirements, and that it will notify the bank, broker or other financial institution of any changes made; and :7 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk of the City of Edina is authorized and directed to certify, under the seal of the City of Edina, to you a true copy of these resolutions and • specimen signatures of each and every person empowered by these resolutions; and I FURTHER CERTIFY that said resolutions shall continue in full force and effect, until revoked or modified by the Edina City Council and written notice is received by the bank, broker or other financial institution, such notice setting forth a resolution adopted to effect said revocation or modification and authorizing the new signatory and/or person authorized to obligate the City of Edina securities transaction. Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Dated this 5u' day of January, 2010. Attest: Debra A. Mangen, 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 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 20_. • City Clerk CITY OF EDINA • DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY 1. POLICY It is the policy of the City to invest public funds in a manner which will provide the highest investment return with minimum risk while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the City and conforming to all federal, state and local regulations governing the investment of public funds. Investment portfolio risk will be minimized to ensure that liquidity and marketability are maintained. The City will not invest in instruments that it cannot hold until maturity. Although investments are subject to short-term volatility, it is critical that a long -term investment focus be maintained. The City will invest in securities that match the city's cash flow needs and debt service requirements. 2. SCOPE This investment policy applies to all financial assets of the City of Edina and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "City") except those (if any) which are governed in another manner by specific reference in federal, state and/or local statutes. All assets to which this policy applies are accounted for in the City's comprehensive annual financial report and include: General Fund Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Funds • Capital Project Funds Enterprise Funds Trust and Agency Funds Internal Service Funds Any other newly created fund 3. STANDARDS The Finance Director is responsible for implementing these policies. The standard of prudence to be used shall be the "Prudent Investor rule," an will be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio: "investments shall be made with judgment and care — under circumstances then prevailing — which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived." City employees meeting this standard will be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. Bonding of the Finance Director shall be required. The City Manager will establish specific bonding levels. 4. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES • The primary objective of the City of Edina's investment activities shall be: A. Safety - The preservation of principal shall be the paramount objective of the investment program of the City of Edina. Investments shall be selected in a manner that will attempt to ensure the safety of the City's capital. This will be accomplished through a program of diversification and maturity limitations for each individual pool or fund of investments. These limitations will be determined by the Finance Director and the investment advisory committee and will be kept on file with the Finance Director. The objective will be to mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. 40 a. Credit Risk The City will minimize credit risk, which is the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer by: • Limiting investments to the types of securities listed in Section 6 of this investment policy • Pre - qualifying the financial institutions, broker /dealers, intermediaries, and advisors with which the City will do business in accordance with Section 8 of this investment policy. • Diversifying the investment portfolio so that the impact of potential losses from any one type of security or from any one individual issuer will be minimized in accordance with Section 9 of this investment policy. b. Interest Rate Risk The City will minimize interest rate risk, which is the risk that the market value of securities in the portfolio will fall due to changes in market interest rates, by: • Structuring the investment portfolio so that securities mature to meet cash requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to sell securities on the open market prior to maturity • Investing operating funds primarily in shorter -term securities, money market mutual funds, or similar investment pools and limiting the average maturity of the portfolio in accordance with this policy. B. Liquidity — The City's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the city to meet all operating requirements that might reasonably be anticipated. The portfolio will be structured so that securities mature concurrent with cash needs to meet anticipated demands (static liquidity). Furthermore, since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio should consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets (dynamic liquidity). Alternatively, a portion of the • portfolio may be placed in money market mutual funds or local government investment pools which offer same day liquidity for short-term funds. C. Return on Investment - The city's investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return. The core of investments is limited to low -risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed. Securities shall generally be held until maturity with the following exceptions. • A security with declining credit may be sold early to minimize loss of principal. • A security swap would improve the quality, yield, or target duration in the portfolio. • Liquidity needs of the portfolio require that the security be sold. 5 ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from conducting personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Investment officials shall annually disclose to the City Clerk any material financial interests as required by state statute on an annual Statement of Economic Interest form. Employees and officers shall subordinate their personal investment transactions to those of the City, particularly with regard to the time of purchases and sales, and shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual with whom business is conducted on behalf of the City. 6. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS Investment instruments authorized and permitted by this policy are as follows: A. Obligations of the United States or its agencies under a repurchase agreement if the margin • agreement under the repurchase agreement is 101 percent and with any of the following institutions. 1) a bank qualified as depository of public funds, 2) any national or state bank in the United States which is a member of the Federal Reserve System and whose combined capital and surplus equals or exceeds $10,000,000, • 3) a primary reporting dealer in the United States government securities to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 4) a securities broker -- dealer having its principal executive office in Minnesota, licensed pursuant to Chapter 80A, or an affiliate of it, regulated by the Securities and Exchange commission and maintaining a combined capital and surplus of $40,000,000 or more, exclusive of subordinated debt. B. Governmental bonds, notes, bills, mortgages and other securities, which are direct obligations or are guaranteed or insured issues of the United States, its agencies, its instrumentalities, or organizations created by an act of Congress, excluding mortgage- backed securities defined as "high risk" (as defined below) or in certificates of deposit secured by letters of credit issued by federal Home Loan Banks. High risk mortgage- backed securities are as follows: 1) interest - -only or principal -only mortgage- backed securities, 2) any mortgage derivative security that: a) has an expected average life greater than ten years, b) has an expected average life that: i) will extend by more than four years as the result of an immediate and sustained parallel shift in the yield curve of plus 300 basis points: or ii) will shorten by more than six years as the result of an immediate and sustained parallel shift in the yield curve of minus 300 basis points: or c) will have an estimated change in price of more than 17 percent as the result of an immediate and sustained parallel shift in the yield curve of plus or minus 300 basis points. C. Shares of an investment company registered under the Federal Investment company Act of 1940, whose shares are registered under the Federal Securities Act of 1933, and whose only investments are in: 1) securities described in `B" above, 2) general obligation tax- exempt securities rated AA or better by a national bond rating service, and 3) repurchase or reverse repurchase agreements fully collateralized by securities described above if the agreements are only entered into with an entity which is: a) a primary reporting dealer to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or b) one of the 100 largest U.S. commercial banks. D. State and local government obligation as follows: 1) Any security which is a general obligation of any state or local government with taxing powers which is rated "AA" or better by a national bond rating service. 2) Any security which is a revenue obligation of any state of local government with taxing posers which is rated "AA" or better by a national rating service. 3) A general obligation of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency which is a moral obligation of the State of Minnesota and is rated "AA" or better by a national rating agency. E. Banker's acceptances of United States Corporation or their Canadian subsidiaries that is rated by at least.two nationally recognized rating agencies, "Al" by Moody's Investors Service, `B1" by Standard and Poor's Corporation, "Fl" by Fitch and matures in 270 days or less. F. Commercial paper issued by United States corporations or their Canadian subsidiaries that is rated by at least two nationally recognized rating agencies; "Al" by Moody's Investors Service, "P1" by Standard and Poor's Corporation, "Fl" by Fitch, and matures in 270 days or less. G. Guaranteed investment contact. Agreements or contracts for guaranteed investment contracts may • be entered into if they are guaranteed by United States commercial banks, domestic branches of foreign banks, United States insurance companies, or their Canadian subsidiaries, or the domestic affiliates of any of the foregoing. The credit quality of the issuer's or guarantor's short and long- term unsecured debt must be rated in one of the highest categories by a nationally recognized rating agency. Should the issuer's or guarantor's credit quality be downgraded below "A ", the government entity must have withdrawal rights. Guar_._ «.....1 (gie) issued or guaranteed by a United States commereial bank er domestie braneh of a foreign ba4 a a United States ins"rattee eotftpany or its Canadian or �4ttited States subsidiary prffvided if ranks on -s • rated, parity with the seftior unseeared debt abligations of the �ar. And 1) if it is a lang term gi either. a) the !art, tittseettred debt of the isseer or guaranter is , basis of a rating af seeh obligations would be or , in the highest er ne 4ig4icS£ r-ating eategety of C «....,1,...,1 JC. Uoor's Gat:..,.rat . LMe ads— iicvesfar —s b) if the issuer is a bank with 4eadquar-tefs in , the lang unseeured debt of the :,......._ is rated, eel:......:,._.. 1_,.,.1_,.,1 1__. 1,,....ers of credit of the issuey if forming the primary basis ef a rating ef stteh abligatietts would be rated in one of the three high Vries of Standard & Poor's Corporation, , Moody's lxivester Servie., T_ _ 1,.- nationally _,.,.,.gnize 2) ratirtg of stteh abligatiefts would be rated, in the highest twe rating eategeries of Standard & Poor's earporatiatt, ,food 's investors - - Service, hie., or _.:1.._ nationally r -,.,1 ratiftg agen • H. Certificates of deposit at state and federally chartered banks and savings and loan associations. All investments made under this subsection shall be limited to the amount of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation or shall be secured in the manner set forth in Minnesota statute 118.005. The certificate of deposit should be in the form of a discounted security maturing in the amount not to exceed the insurance coverage or in the amount so that at any time the face amount together with any accrued interest does not exceed the insurance coverage. I. The City will not purchase securities that are considered highly sensitive. A highly sensitive investment is a debt instrument with contract terms that make the investments fair value highly sensitive to interest rate changes. E-3-----•-1-- '- -1••a- - .._,.e note., :_,1......_.,._«: -:_.. nete., step riates and bands, variable-rate investments w" eatipan tftultiphers, and eattpons that vary kwersely 1) Obligations whose coupon payments are determined largely or entirely by an embedded range accumulation option. For example, range notes. 2) Obligations that the interest rate and principal repayment adjusts opposite to the changes in the market. For example, inverse floaters. 3) Obligations that under certain environments may pay no interest. For example, principal only securities. 4) Obligations where the variable rate coupon amount enhances or amplifies the effects of interest rate changes by greater than a one -to -one basis. For example variable -rate investment with coupon multipliers. 5) Mortgage- backed securities that do not pass the Federal Financial Institution Examination Council (FFIEC) stress test which includes the following: a) has an expected average life greater than ten years, b) has an expected average life that will extend by more than four years as the result of an immediate and sustained parallel shift in the yield curve of plus 300 basis points or will shorten by more than six years as the result of an immediate and sustained parallel shift in the yield curve of minus 300 basis points: or c) will have an estimated change in price of more than 17 percent as the result of an immediate and sustained parallel shift in the yield curve of plus or minus 300 basis points. J. The City will not purchase securities that could expose the City to foreign currency risk. K. Proceeds from the issuance of tax- exempt debt securities shall be invested, recorded and reported • in the manner set forth by the U.S. Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service so as to preserve the tax- exempt status of the debt securities. 0 7. SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY Investments may be held in safekeeping with: A. Any Federal Reserve Bank, B. Any bank authorized under the laws of the United States or any state to exercise corporate trust powers, including but not limited to the bank from which the investment is purchased, C. A primary reporting dealer in United States government securities to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or D. A securities broker - dealer having its principal executive office in Minnesota, licensed pursuant to Chapter 80A, or an affiliate of it, regulated by the securities and exchange commission and maintaining a combined capital and surplus of $40,000,000 or more, exclusive of subordinated debt. The City's ownership of all securities in which the fund is invested should be evidenced by written acknowledgments identifying the securities by: A. The Names of issuers, B. The Maturity dates, C. The Interest rates, D. Any Serial Numbers or other distinguishing marks. The broker /dealer may not invest in securities that are both uninsured and unregistered and are exposed to custodial credit risk in either the following situations: a. Investments are held by the counterparty: or b. Investments are held by the counterparty's trust department or agent, but not in the name of the City. • S. SECURITY DEALERS, INSTITUTIONS, AND CONSULTANTS The Finance Director shall maintain a list of security dealers and financial institutions authorized to provide investment services to the City of Edina. The Finance Director shall develop appropriate criteria, when necessary, for the further evaluation and selection of specific broker - dealers, institutions, consultants and/or external money managers. Prudence, rating services, analysis of current financial statement, key ratios and other statistical data compilation and/or specific other knowledge are expected to be utilized as components of the evaluation and selection criteria. A current financial statement of each broker - dealer, institution, consultant and/or external money manager which the City is using in execution of this policy must be kept on file by the Finance Director. The broker /dealer must sign the Broker Notification and Certification form required by Minnesota Statutes 118A, including this investment policy, prior to any investment transactions with the City. The Broker Notification and Certification must be updated annually. A. Qualified broker - dealers will be those security broker - dealers who maintain an office in the state and who are selected according to credit worthiness and approved by the Finance Director and the investment advisory committee. Only broker - dealers who are recognized as "primary dealers" by the Market Reports Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and/or regional dealers that qualify under Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 150 -1 (uniform net capital rule) may be used for City investment placement. B. Qualified institutions will be those banks, savings banks and saving and loans institutions which are generally recognized by applicable federal, state and local statutes as being authorized to receive investments from the City. Approved institutions will be those named generally above, whom also meet further selection criteria developed by the city including maintaining an investment office within the Twin Cities metropolitan area and having other Minnesota local government clients. Approval is to be determined jointly by the Finance Director and the • investment advisory committee. C. External consultants may be engaged and used when necessary and prudent to further and/or enhance the execution of this policy. A consultant is defined for the purposes of this policy as being an individual or firm having expertise relative to execution of this policy who may be engaged to serve in and advisory role without the purpose of receiving investment deposits from the City for the further purpose of generating a return on the placement. Approval of a consultant must be given jointly by the Finance Director and the investment advisory committee. No funds are • to be placed directly with a consultant. D. External money managers may be engaged and used in the execution of this policy as long as the external money manager(s) is limited to investment activities within the confines of this policy. An external money manager must maintain appropriate diversification as noted later in this policy. Any external money manager engaged by the City will be required to provide an accounting and performance report to the Finance Director at a frequency not less than quarterly. External money managers must be approved by the Finance Director and the investment advisory committee. 9. INVESTMENT PARAMETERS The investments shall be diversified by: • Limiting investments to avoid over - concentration in securities from a specific issuer or business sector (excluding U.S. Treasury Securities) • Limiting investment in securities that have higher credit risks • Investing in securities with varying maturities, and • Continuously investing a portion of the portfolio in readily available funds such as local government investment pools, money market funds or overnight repurchase agreements to ensure that appropriate liquidity is maintained in order to meet ongoing obligations. 10. INTERNAL CONTROL The Finance Director is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the City are protected from loss, theft or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived: and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits • requires estimates and judgments. The internal controls are addressed in the procedures manual. 11. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The investment portfolio will be designed to obtain a market rate of return during budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the City's investment risk constraints and cash flow needs. The investment portfolio will be structured to meet specific criteria addressing safety, liquidity and yield. 12. QUARTERLY REVIEW This investment policy, the schedule of diversification and maturity limitations by pool or group of investable funds, authorized broker - dealers, authorized investments and all other aspects of these investment policies will be reviewed on a quarterly basis. The Finance Director shall prepare by the 25`h of the month following the end of each calendar quarter, a report of investments held, including the market value, interest rate, and maturity date of each security with investment activity by broker and maturity date within each fund holding investments. The report shall also show portfolio investment returns by fund. The Finance Director and the investment advisory committee made up of the City Manager, Assistant City Manager the Assistant Finance Director, and the Park Director will review the information and make any proposed modifications. The scheduled quarterly process shall not inhibit desirable modifications to the policy at other times during the year. 2010 Investment Policy is • • Item V. A. EMS Week Proclamation PROCLAMATION EMS WEEK MAY 17 -231 2015 WHEREAS, emergency medical services are a vital public service; and WHEREAS, emergency medical services teams of the Edina Fire and Police Departments are ready to provide lifesaving care to those in need 24 hours a day, seven days a week; and WHEREAS, access to quality emergency care dramatically improves the survival rate and recovery rate of those who experience sudden illness or injury; and WHEREAS, the emergency medical services system consist of emergency physicians, emergency nurses, emergency medical technicians, paramedics, firefighters, educators, administrators, and others; and WHEREAS, emergency medical services providers have traditionally served as the safety net of America's health care system; and WHEREAS, emergency medical services responders of the Edina Fire and Police departments engage in thousands of hours of specialized training and continuing education to enhance their lifesaving skills: and WHEREAS, the citizens of the City of Edina benefit daily from the knowledge and skills of these highly trained individuals; and WHEREAS, injury prevention and the appropriate use of the Emergency Medical Services System will help reduce health care cost; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate to recognize the value and the accomplishments of the Edina Police and Edina Fire emergency medical personnel who serve to protect us; WHEREAS, with the theme EMS Strong, the community is encouraged to observe this week recognizing the service received from Emergency Medical Services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we, the City of Edina City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of May 17 -23, 2015 as "Emergency Medical Services Week" In the City of Edina in honor and recognition of the valuable contributions made by the Edina Emergency Medical Service Providers to the health and well -being of our citizens. Mayor James B. Hovland To: Mayor and Council From: Jordan Gilgenbach, Communications Coordinator Date: May 19, 2015 Subject: "Speak Up, Edina" Report o Ce:. V� Cn v � X088 Agenda Item #: V. B. Action Requested: Receive report on April 2015 "Speak Up, Edina" discussion about City taglines. Information / Background: Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information ❑x Since June 2012, the City of Edina has used the online engagement website, www.SpeakUpEdina.org, to collect ideas and opinions from residents. One of the City Council's six strategic priorities for 2014 -2015 is Communication and Engagement: "To clearly understand community needs, expectations and opinions, the City will consistently seek the input of a broad range of stakeholders in meaningful and interactive communication." A goal of that is to host a monthly discussion on www.SpeakUpEdinaorg. In April 2015, the discussion topic centered on city taglines. In this discussion, the City posed the following questions: • The City doesn't currently have an official tagline. Should Edina have one? Why or why not? • Do you have an idea or suggestion for a tagline? • What sort of community characteristics should be incorporated if one were to be created? The discussion was open for comments between April I and May 1. During that time, 18 comments were made. Additionally, 675 users visited the site 881 times, garnering 3,698 page views. Note, during this same period, a discussion on the Redevelopment of the Former Public Works Site was also active. All commenters in this discussion were from Edina. Attached are the comments for the discussion. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 City Tagline Closed May 01, 2015 • Discussion - 14 Participants • 3 Topics • 18 Answers • 2 Replies • 5 Votes 14 3 18 2 5 PARTICIPANTS TOPICS ANSWERS REPLIES VOTES SUMMARY OF TOPICS IS A TAGLINE NEEDED? & 10 Answers • 2 Replies The City doesn't currently have an official tagline. Should Edina have one? Why or why not? Joel Stegner • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55435) • Apr 03, 2015 9:19 pm i::� 0 Votes A tagline is helpful if its memorable and says something distinctive about the city. For example, City of Lakes works wonderfully because it is memorable, distinctive, positive and accurate. The number of lakes in Minneapolis and their great beauty help create a healthy, wholesome image of a city with lots to take people outside, despite the weather. One reason I choose to live in Edina in 1985, as a Democrat in what was then a Republican place,was the emphasis on achievement and not settling for second best. knew that my children would have an excellent education and would develop their potential,being surrounded by people who lived with mission and purpose. While the city has turned over,l think its achievement oriented has persistented.Today, I think that the idea of the best life possible for everyone who lives here is really what our city wants to achieve. There is plenty of debate about what that looks like, but our level of career, civic and volunteer engagement is extraordinary. Tom Brewitz • Citizen • (Postal Code: unknown) • Apr 15, 2015 2:14 pm i"j 2 Votes Taglines are useful as are slogans. As a consultant for Cornermark I offer some rules. Two words are superb, three are great, four is OK and more may get too busy. I suggest shortening it to something like, "Live, Learn, Grow" Brainstorming other ideas could be easily done, making a list of possibilities and never really getting settled on one until a selection of ideas are put together. Keep in mind, there are no bad ideas initially. It is best to include all of them regardless as even marginal ones may lead to another spinoff to a better one. "Live, Work, Play" 1 of 4 Full Report 0 is City Tagline Closed May 01, 2015 • Discussion • 14 Participants • 3 Topics • 18 Answers • 2 Replies • 5 Votes ' Community for family & commerce. "Empower, Excel, Reside - Edina" This is just a start. I hope some of you might add to these! Response: • Citizen • (Postal Code: unknown) • Apr 15, 2015 2:24 pm Tom, thank you for your guidance. I really like your ideas -- concise and precise! David Frenkel • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55424) • Apr 15, 2015 5:44 pm i::� 2 Votes would like to know who is behind this besides the 'the city is interested'. The city has been adding staff the past few years, is this the work we pay the new people to do? Looking at the priorities of the city this shouldn't be on the radar. Neither Bloomington or Richfield have tag lines and the tag lines of Minnetonka and Plymouth have to do with quality of life. Just leave it and move on and let the 'interested people' at the City of Edina find more important things to do. Response: Marilyn Ustvan • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55436) • Apr 15, 2015 9:04 pm I agree with David -- try focusing on the deteriorating 50th street bridge or preserving /creating affordable housing instead of McMansions, rather than taglines. • Citizen • (Postal Code: unknown) • Apr 15, 2015 6:14 pm i�j 0 Votes As a (retired) photojournalist and person interested in promoting arts and culture in Edina, I know that tag lines can be valuable in the competitive world of drawing people to events and places. We need to be forward thinking and encourage people to live, shop, enjoy art and our great community assets. I agree with Tom's suggestion that three or four words are the maximum for tag line effectiveness. Live, Work, Enjoy David Frenkel • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55424) • Apr 15, 2015 9:12 pm i�j 1 Votes If you want to attract people to Edina for events I would suggest the city hire a social media person to keep the city of Edina web site up to date and content fresh. The web site is dated and is seldom updated. For example the Braemar Ice Arena hosted a regional figure skating event this winter that drew hundreds of participants yet there was nothing on any city web site about it. It was probably the biggest event Edina will host this year. Logos are great but if you don't have social media to back it up a logo is worthless. Chip Jones • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55436) • Apr 15, 2015 11:10 pm 0 0 Votes Tag lines always seem contrived to me. They might have importance in today's fast paced lifestyle, but I really agree with David. Edina really misses the mark on 2 of 4 Full Report City Tagline Closed May 01, 2015 • Discussion • 14 Participants • 3 Topics • 18 Answers • 2 Replies • 5 Votes announcing and mentioning things going on around the City via social media, etc. Instead of devoting time to creating a catchy tag line, the city should be more focused on getting the word out about things going on around the City. This would do far more good from a branding perspective than a catchy tagline. Cindy Perusse • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55436) • Apr 16, 2015 1:49 am 6 0 Votes Tag lines are part of how a city brands itself. I think we can throw some ideas around without expending a whole lot of time or money. I like that the city offers this forum for easy community input. The rule of three seems to work best and I agree with Tom. What I have learned about Edina in the 11 years that I have lived here is the population has generations of Edinans. I have friends who were raised here, went away to college, came back and raised their own families here and sometimes bought the house they grew up in. Doesn't happen like that in many other communities. The draw is education, low crime, close to downtown Mpls and lovely neighborhoods. Can't think of a catch phrase at the moment that would encompass these aspects. • Citizen • (Postal Code: unknown) • May 01, 2015 8:43 pm i�j 0 Votes don't see the need for a tagline. Most civic taglines sound roughly the same, and quickly become dated. Too often, they sound like a setup for a joke. Also, as others have pointed out, using any resources at all for this seems misguided. Not only does it cost money to come up with a tagline, its costs even more to add it to signs, stationery, etc. TAGLINE SUGGESTIONS iQ 6 Answers • 0 Replies Do you have an idea or suggestion for a tagline? Joel Stegner • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55435) • Apr 03, 2015 9:28 pm i�j 0 Votes First suggestion -a place to excel together. Second suggestion - buzzing with energy. Third suggestion - every day I need achievement. Jon DeMars Victorsen • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55435) • Apr 06, 2015 3:05 am 6 0 Votes Edina - money well spent Edina - 1st bling suburb Edina - epic urbane living Jon DeMars Victorsen • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55435) • Apr 13, 2015 1:19 am 6 0 Votes Edina - the greens are greener on this side of the fence! 3 of 4 Full Report 7 U City Tagline Closed May 01, 2015 • Discussion • 14 Participants • 3 Topics • 18 Answers • 2 Replies • 5 Votes Citizen • (Postal Code: unknown) • Apr 15, 2015 4:40 pm i�5 0 Votes Now think about it "...No, it's Edina." Donna Callender • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55436) • Apr 15, 2015 5:40 pm 1:!5 0 Votes There's extra money lying around and it's being used for this ?? Seriously? No wonder people think we're shallow idiots. • Citizen • (Postal Code: unknown) • Apr 15, 2015 11:14 pm i'j 0 Votes Why live anywhere else? CHARACTERISTICS & 2 Answers • 0 Replies What sort of community characteristics should be incorporated if one were to be created? Joel Stegner • Citizen • (Postal Code: 55435) • Apr 03, 2015 9:23 pm 6 0 Votes Following up my last answer, I think that people who live here set high goals and work hard to achieve them. So, what a thing of is Edina, a place to excel together. In other words,if you live, study or work here, you enhance your ability to do your best, with the help of everyone else who lives here. You don't need to win by having someone else lose, but by taking advantage of the collective energy of the community. Citizen • (Postal Code: unknown) • Apr 16, 2015 5:44 pm 6 0 Votes It should definitely include an aspect of annual special assessments and how everyone votes to pass it making others pay for what they want. 4 of 4 Full Report •'���nRI'OTiA�wO • IAAA To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: VI. A. From: Chad A. Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Action X Discussion ❑ Date: May 19, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Public Hearing - TH 100 Noise Wall Improvements, Improvement No. SA -17, Resolution No. 2015 -50 Action Requested: If the Council determines the project to be necessary, cost - effective, and feasible, Council shall adopt Resolution No. 2015 -50 accepting the engineering study and approving TH 100 Noise Wall Improvements, Improvement No. SA -17. Information / Background: • Recall these improvements will be located along the west side of highway 100 from Minnehaha Creek to Vernon Avenue. Mn /DOT will fund 90% of the improvements and the remaining 10% are required of the local agency. Staff is proposing the 10% local funding is specially assessed to the benefiting properties. MnDOT has verbally agreed to design and construct this wall by the fall of 2016. The final assessment hearing would occur in October 2017. Staff has analyzed the project and feels that the project is necessary, cost - effective, and feasible from an engineering standpoint. Attachment: Resolution No. 2015 -50 Preliminary Engineering Report Certificate of Mailing Notice G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV \PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \SA17 TH100_50th &M'haha Creek W'side \ADMIN \MISC \Item IV.I. RR SA17 Noise Wak.docx City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. � Edina, MN 55424 • • RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -50 RECEIVING ENGINEERING STUDY AND ORDERING NOISE WALL IMPROVEMENTS FOR WESTSIDE TH -100 (VERNON AVENUE TO MINNEHAHA CREEK) IMPROVEMENT NO. SA -17 WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the 21St day of April, 2015, fixed a date for a council hearing on Improvement No. SA -17, the proposed improvement of Noise Wall; and WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 1 9th day of May, 2015, 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: I . Such improvement is necessary, cost - effective, and feasible to reduce noise and provide visual screening from TH -100 and Vernon Avenue. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 3. The city engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. MnDOT 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: May 19, 2015 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, 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 May 19, 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 20_ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952 - 826 -0371 - Fax 952 - 826 -0392 City Clerk • 0 �e r y PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT: SA -17 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA NOISE WALL IMPROVEMENTS WEST SIDE OF TH100 — VERNON AVENUE TO MINNEHAHA CREEK MAY 19, 2015 SUMMARY: The project involves installation of a noise wall along the west side of trunk highway (TH) 100 from Minnehaha Creek to Vernon Avenue, approximately to the Canadian Pacific Railroad Tracks. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has programmed design and construction of this wall for 2016. The estimated total project cost is $950,000. Funding for the project will be a combination of MnDOT funds and special assessments. Per MnDOT's, noise wall policy, 90% of the cost will be funded by MnDOT and 10% is the responsibility of the local agency. The assessments for this improvement range from $1,000 to $3,000 per REU depending on proximity to the wall. LOCATION: Westerly side of TH100 from Vernon Avenue to Minnehaha Creek as shown below. Proiect Location Preliminary Engineering Report West side of TH100 — Vernon Avenue to Minnehaha Creek May 19, 2015 • Page 2 INITIATION & ISSUES: This project has been discussed and considered seriously for more than 10- years. It has been on MnDOT priority list ranging in rank from #25 to currently #5 out of more than 200 projects. MnDOT has capacity to design, construct, and fund 90% of this wall in 2016. The remaining 10% of the funding would be locally funded through assessments to benefiting properties. Resident Input As part of the Engineering Department's practice of notifying residents to a potential construction project, residents were invited to an informational meeting on March 10, 2015. Over the years, there have been numerous meetings with the residents to discuss this project. Support has varied due to the high assessment considerations in the past. Based on current comments, there is strong support for this project. Resident input was also taken in the form of emails or voicemails regarding the project. A map was created showing the properties that voiced support for the project. Staff Input • We solicited input from the Public Works, Community Development, Fire, and Police Departments. Fire: The Fire Department commented on the need to mark the location of fire hydrants on both sides of the wall when hydrants are in proximity to the wall. Community Development: The department noted the potential development on Vernon Avenue and the effect of the wall on access to the Vernon Avenue sidewalk. The approved development has not moved forward with their plans and it sounds like nothing is eminent. Therefore we believe the wall should be constructed as proposed by MnDOT with the understanding that portions could be removed or opened up for pedestrian access with future development. Public Works and Police: These departments did not have any comments or concerns with the proposed project. EXISTING CONDITIONS: TH100 was constructed during the mid- 1970's. TH100 between Minnehaha Creek and West 50th Street or Vernon Avenue is a six -lane roadway. The residences along Edinbrook Lane are located very close to the off -ramp to Vernon Avenue and also southbound TH100; see photo below. Preliminary Engineering Report West side of TH100 — Vernon Avenue to Minnehaha Creek May 19, 2015 • Page 3 • • 0 0 P ai R a IMPROVEMENT: This project involves constructing a wall that would range in height from 6 -ft along Vernon Avenue to 20 -ft near Edinbrook Lane. The wall would reduce noise and provide visual screening from TH100 and Vernon Avenue. MnDOT estimated the reduction in noise using a noise model. A copy of those results can be found in the Appendix. The sound wall will be similar to the sound wall constructed north of Minnehaha Creek along TH100. This wall is constructed of concrete columns with wood planks placed between; see photo below. RIGHT -OF -WAY: Adequate right -of -way exists; sound wall will be constructed within MNDOT right -of -way. Existing Wall north of Minnehaha Creek Preliminary Engineering Report West side of TH100 — Vernon Avenue to Minnehaha Creek May 19, 2015 is Page 4 EASEMENTS: No additional easements will be required. COMPLETION: 2016 Construction Season PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated construction cost is $945,000. MnDOT has verbally agreed to cover 90% of the costs for this project. A construction agreement will need to be executed between the City of Edina and MnDOT prior to start of final design. ASSESSMENTS: A special assessment of approximately $1,000 to $3,000 per residential equivalent unit (REU) will be levied against residents within the assessment area. The range of assessments is distributed to properties receiving benefit of the sound wall. The assessments can be spread out over 15 years. Staff is recommending a final assessment hearing be held one year after the completion of the project. FEASIBILITY: The proposed improvements as outlined in this study are found to be necessary, cost effective, and feasible from an engineering standpoint. PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: Council Orders Public Hearing ........ ..........................April 21, 2015 Public Improvement Hearing ........ ............................May 19, 2015 Construction Begins ................. ............................... Summer 2016 Final Assessment Hearing ................ ........................October 2017 Appendix: A. March 10, 2015 Invite Letter B. Neighborhood Meeting Presentation C. Sign -In Sheet for March 10, 2015 D. Resident Correspondence E. Preliminary Assessment Roll and Map F. MnDOT's Noise Level Model Results G. Map Showing Residents' Support • Noise Wall Improvements West Side of TH 100 from Minnehaha Creek to Vernon Avenue February 23, 2015 Dear Resident: Some of you may recall discussion about this noise wall has been ongoing for over I 0- years. The last update from us was June 19, 2013, when we notified you that the noise wall had moved up on Mn /DOT's priority list from #20 to #5. We received good news again from Mn /DOT! Mn /DOT notified us that there is an opening in their construction schedule for 2016/17 for this noise wall. Staff expressed support for the 2016/17 construction schedule and would like to hear from you. We are hosting an informational meeting on Mar. 10, 4:30 — 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at Edina City Hall, located at 4801 W. 50" Street. The meeting will cover such items as potential work to be done, preliminary project costs, and estimated assessments, followed by a short question and answer session. Representatives from the City and Mn /DOT will be in attendance. Senator Melisa Franzen may also be in attendance. Funding for the wall, per Mn /DOT's Noise Wall Policy, is a cost share split with Mn /DOT paying 90% and 10% to be paid locally. The 10% local cost would be assessed to residents that receive benefit from the noise wall installation. See the back side of this letter for the preliminary project costs and assessments. If you have any questions, please contact me at 952 - 826 -0318 or cmillner @EdinaMN.gov. Sincerely, Z44. VA_ Chad A. Millner, PE Director of Engineering cc: Senator Melisa Franzen (by e -mail only) April Crocket, MnDOT (by e -mail only) Peter Wasko, MnDOT (by e -mail only) G:\PW\CENTRALSVCS\ENG D1V\PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \SA17 TH100_50th &M'haha Creek W'side \ADMIN \CORR \20130501 Wall Update wh- rev.docx ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 -826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 �9�NA.,yr'4 rO B t*,a Sound Wall Hwy 100 from Vernon Ave to Minnehaha Creek (west side) Improvement No. SA17 Proposed Assessments 2017 E] First Tier Properties $ 3,000 ED Second Tier Properties $ 2,000 Third Tier Properties $ 1,000, N W +E S Engineering Dept. February, 2015 E 9 is CITY OF e' Noise Wall Improvements West Side of TH100 Minnehaha Creek to Vernon Ave Informational Meeting March 10, 2015 s. Process / Timeline 2012 Informational Meeting 2013 Listed as #5 on MnDOTs priority list 2015 Added to MnDOT's construction schedule for'16 /'17 • 2015 Senate Bill #546 Introduced by Senator Franzen — Requesting appropriations in 2015 • 2015 Informational Meeting 5/13/2015 Agenda z` ` • Introductions • Location Map • Process / Timeline • Project Components • Funding • What You Can Expect • Communication • How to Prepare • Q &A �H4 Project Location • 2004 Considered as part of THIN Walls in SIP Process • 2006 Petition #1 from residents •� •WI • 2008 Listed as #25 on MnDOT s priority list � a`ti • • 2008 Resident Survey - split results tntormationat� • 2011 Petition #2 from residents Pubs, Z!, meeting _ ap. hearing Pro)etl Planning s. Process / Timeline 2012 Informational Meeting 2013 Listed as #5 on MnDOTs priority list 2015 Added to MnDOT's construction schedule for'16 /'17 • 2015 Senate Bill #546 Introduced by Senator Franzen — Requesting appropriations in 2015 • 2015 Informational Meeting 5/13/2015 Agenda z` ` • Introductions • Location Map • Process / Timeline • Project Components • Funding • What You Can Expect • Communication • How to Prepare • Q &A 1 �H4 Process / Timeline • 2004 Considered as part of THIN Walls in SIP Process • 2006 Petition #1 from residents • 2008 Listed as #25 on MnDOT s priority list • 2008 Resident Survey - split results tntormationat� • 2011 Petition #2 from residents Pubs, infrastructure 1 e� Process &aluate tntormationat� reasbd,ty Pubs, infrastructure meeting riudy hearing Pro)etl Planning &ds Construction final ordered 8 bidding awarded begins assessmeni 1 0 • • Project Components 6 -ft to 20 -ft Wood Wall Located within Highway 100 Right -of -Way Design and Administration by MnDOT A2 Funding MnDOT s Noise Wall Policy - 90% MnDOT / 10% Local 10% Local is funded by special assessments Special assessments are assigned to adjacent properties that stand to benefit from construction improvements. 5/13/2015 e J, Do Taxes Cover Wall Projects? • Roughly 20 percent of your property taxes go to the City for expenses such as Police, Fire, Parks and Public Works (snowplowing, pothole repairs, sealcoating, and other street maintenance). • Your taxes do not pay for wall construction. KW 10D trpn W Av W Mir•wn C w Iwesi e 6P 7]]451 Novo a—, P. Nadi 10. 7015 Ni. Preliminary Assessment 0:11" • Preliminary assessments divided over 3 tiers Tier 1 = $3,000 per REU Tier 2 = $2,000 per REU Tier 3 = $1,000 per REU REU - Residential Equivalent Unit, 1 single family home 0 • Payment Options • Timing for the assessment - 2 options - Prior to construction - After construction Assessments are payable over 15 years Payment options: 1. Pay entire amount upon receiving bill to avoid finance charges 2. Pay 25 percent; balance rolls to property taxes 3. Roll entire amount to property taxes 4. Defer payment if 65 years old or older • • _ \ �a e • �, Communication Tools %J • You will be notified of all meetings, hearings, and schedules via regular mail. • Public hearing notices are also published in Edina Sun - Current. • Final assessment notices are mailed. • • 5/13/2015 OF` ��> )'. What You Can Expect • We will keep you informed of the project and its progress. • You will have opportunities to provide input. • We will do our best to minimize inconveniences, but construction does not come without pain points. • Dust, noise, vibrations. le �� City Extra "City Extra' emails are the best way to receive regular updates once construction begins. These are free weekly email updates about your project. • Sign upon City of Edina website, www.EdinaNiN.gov. - Check the box next to your project name. • If you cannot receive email, we will mail you City Extra updates upon request. • Its the best way to stay informed. CITY OF Contact Us Email: mail@edinamnggv Call: 952- 826 -0371 Visit: Engineering Department 7450 Metro Blvd. 3 URI How to Prepare • Sign up for City Extra • Begin financial planning • Ask questions; stay informed 5/13/2015 OF` ��> )'. What You Can Expect • We will keep you informed of the project and its progress. • You will have opportunities to provide input. • We will do our best to minimize inconveniences, but construction does not come without pain points. • Dust, noise, vibrations. le �� City Extra "City Extra' emails are the best way to receive regular updates once construction begins. These are free weekly email updates about your project. • Sign upon City of Edina website, www.EdinaNiN.gov. - Check the box next to your project name. • If you cannot receive email, we will mail you City Extra updates upon request. • Its the best way to stay informed. CITY OF Contact Us Email: mail@edinamnggv Call: 952- 826 -0371 Visit: Engineering Department 7450 Metro Blvd. 3 • • • Thanks for your time! Questions? CITY OF EDINA Typical Timeline ~� April-May Feasibility report and estimates provided May Public hearing June Plan preparation and bidding July /August Construction begins September Construction concludes Fail 2015 Final assessment hearing 5/13/2015 El • • A a�e� cn v ,� �o • IN�'1A POM`t� 1000 NOISE WALL IMPROVEMENTS WEST SIDE OF TH100 INFORMATIONAL MEETING MARCH 10, 2015 y tey NAME ADDRESS 1 5' /Ii / rN J—/ v �' w. 3 li - Gti G 4 5 &Z 6 7 Q/ 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 y tey From: Lynette Biunno On Behalf Of Edina Mail Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 9:42 AM To: Sharon Allison Subject: FW: 4800 Westbrook Hi Sharon, Do these need to go to your dept. or should they be going elsewhere ?? Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952 - 927 -8861 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 Ibiunno @EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - - - -- Original Message From: Amber Mrnak [mailto:am berm rnak @me.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 9:21 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: 4800 Westbrook As new residents of Edina, we were elated to learn of the possible installation of a noise wall. This would greatly improve the quality of our neighborhood. We are in full support. - Amber and Michael Mrnak • Sent from my iPhone n LJ Sharon Allison • From: Knoer, Dennis <DKnoer @Briggs.com> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:01 AM To: Chad Millner Subject: Proposed sound wall on High way 100 sough of Minnehaha Creek r: Hi Chad, My name is Dennis Knoer. My wife and I reside at 4821 Westbrook Lane in Edina. We are located in the First Tier of proposed assessments for the Highway 100 sound wall project. We have not been able to make it to any meetings on the subject, but we wanted to make sure you knew that we are in favor of the sound wall. Please add our address to the "yes" to the sound wall list. Thanks, Dennis Dennis L. Knoer Shareholder Briggs and Morgan, P.A. Direct 612.977.8744 Fax 612.977.8650 dknoer @brioos.com 2200 IDS Center 1 80 South 8th Street I Minneapolis, MN 55402 1 briggs.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e -mail communication and any attached documentation may be privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s). It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized person. The use, distribution, transmittal or re- transmittal by an unintended recipient of this communication is strictly prohibited without our express approval in writing or by e -mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this e -mail, please delete it from your system without copying it and notify the above sender so that our e -mail address may be corrected. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of any attorney - client or work - product privilege. • Sharon Allison • From: Sharon Allison Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 11:15 AM To: 'tmccoy64 @hotmail.com' Cc: Chad Millner; Lynette Biunno Subject: RE: Hwy 100 sa 17 Tom - Thanks for your email. We appreciate your support for the noise wall. Sharon Allison, Engineering Specialist 952 - 826 -0449 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0392 SAllison@EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Lynette Biunno On Behalf Of Edina Mail Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 8:25 AM To: Sharon Allison Subject: FW: Hwy 100 sa 17 •Hi Sharon, Can you assist this person ?? Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 Ibiunno @EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - - - -- Original Message---- - From: tom McCoy [mailto:tmccoy64 @hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 04, 2015 6:58 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Hwy 100 sa 17 Hello, we are at 5021 edinbrook lane ... please count our household as a yes..we see a lot of pros about this wall-thank you Tom McCoy • 1 Sharon Allison • From: Sent: To: Subject: Karen and Bob, Chad Millner Thursday, March 19, 2015 11:11 AM 'kbikegirl @aol.com' TH100 Noise Wall Consideration Thanks for your comments and support of the project. I intend to take this matter to the City Council in the next few months so they can consider approving the project. Since it does have assessments, you will be notified by an official mailing of the date and time of that public hearing. I would welcome continued comments to the council prior to and during that meeting. I would wait to submit comments to them until a date has been set. Thanks for your engagement in this matter, Chad Chad Millner, Director of Engineering $ F. 952- 826 -0318 1 Fax 952- 826 -0392 w - cmiIIner(a)EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business *From: Karen [mailto:kbikegirl(aaol.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 5:29 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: To Chad Millner, Director of Enigneering Dear Mr. Millner, We are out of town, but know of the sound wall discussions & decisions taking place that affect our neighborhood. My husband and I are in FULL SUPPORT of the sound wall project moving forward to completion along Hwy. 100, from near the creek to Vernon Ave. Karen & Bob Bryan 5048 Edinbrook Lane Edina, MN 55436 Sharon Allison • From: Sent: To: Subject: Good morning, Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Monday, May 11, 2015 9:58 AM Sharon Allison; Chad Millner FW: Sound Wall over Minehaha Creek This message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council members, City Engineer Chad Millner and Engineering Specialist, Sharon Allison. �4 Lynette Biunno, Receptionist �@ 952- 927 -88611 Fax 952-826-0389 #, y IbiunnoCa-)EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Karen [mailto:kbikegirl@)aol.com] Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 8:04 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Sound Wall over Minehaha Creek I am a resident at 5048 Edinbrook Lane, and am IN FAVOR of the much needed sound wall project moving forward. Whe vote is on Tuesday May 19, 2015. 1 will be watching your votes in favor of this sound wall along Hwy. 100. Karen Bryan • Sharon Allison • From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:02 AM To: Chad Millner; Sharon Allison Subject: FW: Attention city council and engineering Good morning, This message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council members, City Engineer Chad Millner and Engineering Specialist, Sharon Allison. Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 Ibiunno @EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Mary [ mailto :maltuvilla@earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 9:44 AM To: Edina Mail Cc: Mary Altuvilla Subject: Attention city council and engineering •Subject: TH100 noise wall improvement No. SA -17 Minneapolis Creek to Vernon Ave Good morning, As homeowners in the impacted area we are strongly in favor of the proposed sound wall improvement. We have been residents for over 36 years and feel the quality of life and safety aspect of the wall is long over due. Please vote YES on Tuesday, May 19. The proposal before the Council is the most reasonable option ever presented to the neighborhood. I can't imagine a better offer in the future. Your vote assures strong neighborhood home values and safety for the residents. If you have concerns or want to talk to a homeowner please contact us. We would be happy to share our observations with you. We would also welcome you to visit Edinbrook Lane at Highway 100 to hear and see first hand the noise and close range freeway traffic we experience on a daily basis. Please pass this request for sound wall improvement. Mary and Bill Hartupee 5016 Edinbrook Lane Please confirm this email was received and read. Sent from my iPad • Sharon Allison From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:09 AM To: Chad Millner; Sharon Allison Subject: FW: Proposed Improvement No. SA -17 TH100 Noise Wall Improvements Good morning, This message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council members, City Engineer Chad Millner and Engineering Specialist, Sharon Allison. 0 '` ""ta. Lynette Biunno, Receptionist Q 952- 927 -88611 Fax 952- 826 -0389 Ibiunno(a)EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov '.s ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Ian Abel [mailto:ianhabelCaaaol.com] Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 3:04 PM 01 To: Edina Mail Cc: theabels2 @aol.com; Ian Abel Subject: Re: Proposed Improvement No. SA -17 TH100 Noise Wall Improvements Proposed Improvement No. SA -17 TH100 Noise Wall Improvements Attention: City Council and Engineering, We will be out -of -town on the evening of the meeting; otherwise we would have been attending, as we attended the previous meeting on the subject. As residents of Millpond Place for more than 20 years now, we are excited that this project is finally going to be undertaken. We feel it will greatly improve the neighborhood by reducing the Hwy. 100 noise level as well as providing a visual barrier to the traffic, and for those whose property backs onto the highway, additional privacy. We have been in favor of this project since it was first discussed several years ago, and expect it will provide an additional positive effect on property values as a result. Please include our names as IN FAVOR, in any poll /vote on the proposal. Yours respectfully, 0n & Julie Abel 5104 Millpond Place, Edina, MN 55436 1 w • • NOISE WALL IMPROVEMENTS Westside of TH -100 (Vernon Ave to Minnehaha Creek) Improvement No. SA -17 Preliminary Assessment Roll PID Name Owner Assessable Amount 1 2811721240088 Michael J Kohlman & Carrie M Kohlman 5105 48th St W $2,000 2 2811721240089 John N Justice & Judy Justice 5109 48th St W $1,000 3 2811721240090 Donald Hayward 5113 48th St W $1,000 4 2811721240091 Timothy Sipprell 5117 48th St W $1,000 5 2811721240092 Gary E Wondra & Colleen M Wondra 5121 48th St W $1,000 6 2811721310036 Le Truong 510149th St W $3,000 7 2811721310068 Scott C Losey & Leslie R Losey 5105 49th St W $3,000 8 2811721240107 Tyler Van Brunt 5108 49th St W $1,000 91 2811721310039 Gerald O'Brien 5109 (5107) 49th St W $4,000 10 2811721240106 Michelle S Anderson & Neal T Anderson 5112 49th St W $1,000 11 2811721240105 Gail M K Hetletveot & Bert L Hetletveot 5116 49th St W $1,000 12 2811721310040 Gerald O'Brien 5117 (5115) 49th St W $5,000 13 2811721240104 Anthony Wagner 5120 49th St W $1,000 14 2811721310038 Robert Kimmell 5125 49th St W $2,000 15 2811721240069 Kent D Bishop & Jennifer L Schneider- Bishop 5004 Edinbrook La $3,000 16 2811721240053 Richard Barsamian 5005 Edinbrook La $3,000 17 2811721240111 Amy M Kuemmel & Kevin O Kuemmel 5008 Edinbrook La $3,000 181 2811721240054 Peter Kennedy 5009 Edinbrook La $3,000 19 2811721240073 David Colwell & Charlotte Colwell 5012 Edinbrook La $3,000 20 2811721240055 Ronaele Sayre 5013 Edinbrook La $3,000 21 2811721240074 William C Hartupee & Mary L Hartupee 5016 Edinbrook La $2,000 22 2811721240056 John & Nicole Evenson 5017 Edinbrook La $3,000 23 2811721240075 Andrea & Christopher Piepho 5020 Edinbrook La $1,000 241 2811721240060 Thomas P McCoy & Patricia A Dupree 5021 Edinbrook La $2,000 25 2811721240067 Richard J Manser & Sarah T Manser 5024 Edinbrook La $1,000 26 2811721240057 James J Starr & Noelle K Starr 5025 Edinbrook La $1,000 27 2811721240066 D Johan Carlson & Caroline Y Dietz 5028 Edinbrook La $1,000 28 2811721240058 Mihir & Mukta Sathe 5029 Edinbrook La $1,000 29 2811721240065 Rick Matson 5032 Edinbrook La $1,000 301 2811721240059 Abby Eckstein 5033 Edinbrook La $1,000 31 2811721240064 Todd Swenson 5036 Edinbrook La $1,000 32 2811721240063 Andrea Johnson 5040 Edinbrook La $1,000 33 2811721240062 Kathryn Dangers 5044 Edinbrook La $1,000 34 2811721240061 Robert A Bryan & Karen K Bryan 5048 Edinbrook La $1,000 351 2811721240087 Michael & Amber Mrnak 4800 Westbrook La $2,000 36 2811721240076 Jill & Mark Scullard 4801 Westbrook La $3,000 37 2811721240077 Nina Jacobsen 4805 Westbrook La $3,000 38 2811721240078 Deidre Corniea 4811 Westbrook La $3,000 39 2811721240079 Andrew J Kubitschek & Philip D Cernin 4813 Westbrook La $3,000 40 2811721240080 Barbara Carlson 4817 Westbrook La $3,000 411 2811721240081 Jeannine A Knoer & Dennis L Knoer 4821 Westbrook La $3,000 42 2811721240082 Cahereine Jordan 4825 Westbrook La $3,000 43 2811721240100 Reza Tehrani 4832 Westbrook La $2,000 44 2811721240083 Jeffrey & Joan Meitrodt 4833 Westbrook La $3,000 45 2811721240084 David & Patti Bruflodt 4837 Westbrook La $3,000 46 2811721240108 Nelva Allen 4840 Westbrook La $2,000 471 2811721240085 Michael Beck & Linden Bowman 4841 Westbrook La $3,000 48 2811721240086 Robert Reed & Mary P Reed 4845 Westbrook La $3,000 49 28117212400991 Doris Skold 5101 Millpond PI $2,000 50 2811721240110 Ian H Abel & Julia M Abel 5104 Millpond PI $2,000 51 28117212400961 Theron E Lampe & Kimberly C Holmquist- Fischer 5108 Millpond PI $1,000 • • • NOISE WALL IMPROVEMENTS Westside of TH -100 (Vernon Ave to Minnehaha Creek) Improvement No. SA -17 Preliminary Assessment Roll PID Name Owner Assessable Amount 52 2811721240095 Norberto C Moran & Lisa E Moran 5112 Millpond PI $1,000 53 2811721240101 Stephen J Grossman & Kathy L Grossman 5113 Millpond PI $1,000 54 2811721240094 Scott Kelley 5116 Millpond PI $1,000 55 2811721240102 Oscar C Huerta & Catherine C Huerta 5117 Millpond PI $1,000 56 2811721240093 Eugene Kurth & Carol Kurth 5120 Millpond PI $1,000 57 2811721240103 James Dodge 5121 Millpond PI $1,000 Total $113,000 • v9tiN %\ t� N N Sound Wall Hwy 100 from Vernon Ave to Minnehaha Creek (west side) Improvement No. SA17 Proposed Assessments ® First Tier Properties ® Second Tier Properties Third Tier Properties 2017 $ 3,000 $ 2,000 $ 1,000 N W +E S Engineering Dept. February, 2015 I', /- D fell. 23' 49 51 47 22, 2 0 52 46 0 2 45 5i 24 2 ' F Ir X 28 % ANF 29 p , 7v3- N ;W7 ; 35 34 49th St: hill I 0 F tk f I I- a OL- Owy 100 from Vernon Ave to Minnehaha Creek (west side) SP 2734-51 Noise Barrier Project March 10, 2015 • L Trunk Highway 100 Edina proposed noise barrier (NW of Vernon /100) Address Map ID Noise Level With no wall Noise Level with proposed barrier Reduction Amount 5004 Edinbrook Ln 1 78.3 65.0 13.3 5005 Edinbrook Ln 2 747 62.8 11.9 4801 Westbrook Ln 3 70.0 61.6 8.4 4805 Westbrook Ln 4 69.2 61.0 8.2 4811 Westbrook Ln 5 68.5 60.7 7.8 4813 Westbrook Ln 6 68.4 60.6 7.8 4817 Westbrook Ln 7 68.4 60.5 7.9 4821 Westbrook Ln 8 69.1 60.6 8.5 4825 Westbrook Ln 9 69.1 60.5 8.6 4833 Westbrook Ln 10 68.9 60.4 8.5 4837 Westbrook Ln 11 68.9 60.3 8.6 4841 Westbrook Ln 12 69.6 60.1 9.5 4845 Westbrook Ln 13 69.4 59.9 9.5 5101 49th Street W 14 71.7 60.3 11.4 5105 49th Street W 15 70.3 60.5 9.8 5107 49th Street W 16 68.5 59.7 8.8 5115 49th Street W 17 65.6 59.3 6.3 Pukwana Lane 18 68.2 61.3 6.9 5008 Edinbrook Ln 19 67.1 63.8 3.3 5012 Edinbrook Ln 20 65.9 63.6 2.3 5016 Edinbrook Ln 21 64.4 63.3 1.1 5020 Edinbrook Ln 22 63.4 63.0 0.4 5024 Edinbrook Ln 23 62.4 62.4 0.0 5009 Edinbrook Ln 24 67.7 62.8 4.9 5013 Edinbrook Ln 25 65.0 61.9 3.1 5017 Edinbrook Ln 26 64.2 61.9 2.3 5021 Edinbrook Ln 27 63.4 62.2 1.2 4800 48th Street W 28 62.7 61.0 1.7 5105 48th Street W 29 61.7 60.6 1.1 5104 Mill Pond PL 30 61.7 60.3 1.4 5101 Westbrook LN 31 61.5 60.0 1.5 5116 49th Street W 32 59.4 59.3 0.1 4832 Westbrook LN 32 60.6 59.5 1.1 4840 Westbrook LN 33 61.7 59.8 1.9 5108 49th Street W 34 60.4 59.5 0.9 5112 49th Street W 35 60.0 59.4 0.6 5120 49th Street W 37 58.5 58.5 0.0 5121 Mill Pond PI 38 59.0 59.0 0.0 5117 Mill Pond PI 39 59.4 59.4 0.0 5113 Mill Pond PI 40 60.2 59.6 0.6 5108 Mill Pond PI 41 60.8 59.9 0.9 5112 Mill Pond PI 42 60.1 59.7 0.4 5116 Mill Pond PI 43 59.6 59.5 0.1 5120 Mill Pond PI 44 58.9 58.9 0.0 5033 Edinbrook Ln 45 61.6 61.3 0.3 5029 Edinbrook Ln 46 61.7 61.6 0.1 5025 Edinbrook Ln 47 62.4 62.4 0.0 5028 Edinbrook Ln 48 61.5 61.5 0.0 5032 Edinbrook Ln 49 60.3 60.3 0.0 5036 Edinbrook Ln 50 60.3 60.3 0.0 5040 Edinbrook Ln 51 60.4 60.4 0.0 5044 Edinbrook Ln 52 60.4 60.4 0.0 5048 Edinbrook Ln 53 60.3 60.3 0.0 Notes: All sound levels in 1-10 scale A weighted All numbers in red exceed state noise standards (65 dBA daytime) All bold numbers achieve a minimum 5 decibel reduction Number of properties that exceed state daytime noise standards without noise barrier (65 dBA daytime): 21 Number of properties that exceed state daytime noise standards with noise barrier (65 dBA daytime): o Number of properties that achieve a minimum 5- decibel reduction: 18 4504 4508 12 51 528 32 5 201 48W W:, 4810 481 482 520 4515 4blU cy: 4605 ho 4517 4617 4613 4609 Q 5036 5020" - - -- S 5040 5025 50165012 5008 5004 5044 5029 EDINBROOK LN - - 5048 5033 5021 0 o O° 00 U') Ln 0 Ul) � 48TH ST W 4801 I` (y) d) to O CV - O r- ° 000 4805 mow . Z :� 4811 00 Y c� o 0 0° 4813 LO U') U) Lo W 4821 MILLPOND PL 5101 I. x,482 -5113 �n LID 1&8331 4832 83 C) co CJ 00 `4 o >4841 n o Lo 4840 4845 'a + ... 49TH ST w s L L i7 LCD �` L / c� ° 0 O L0 L0 L") JNegrt VERNON AVE 0 �r 2 O N Proposed Wall 100 E 161 VVUUUHILL 4900, 4901 a 4905 0 COO J } z Z 4909 8 -PF4913 17 Pw 4916 4921 Support Sound Wall Hwy 100 from Vernon Ave to Minnehaha Creek (west side) i Improvement No. SA17 2 Yes N w +E o e m s pro � yv •- .� „�,,,,�• Engineering Dept. May, 2015 • • STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following date Oct. 8, 2014, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Proposed Improvement No. SA -17, TH100 Noise Wall Improvements (Minnehaha Creek to Vernon 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 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. ION"Mi AnnRF .qR WITNESS my hand anq the seal of said City this C'` day of `* 20. -1 Edina City Clerk `May I, 2015 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT NO. SA -17 TH100 NOISE WALL IMPROVEMENTS (MINNEHAHA CREEK TO VERNON AVENUE) The Edina City Council will meet at Edina City Hall, on Tuesday, May 19, 2015, at 7:00 p.m., to consider the public hearing on noise wall improvements for TH 100 from Minnehaha Creek to Vernon Avenue. This hearing is being conducted under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. This hearing has been called as a recommendation from staff. The proposed project would be constructed in the summer of 2016 with the assessment hearing occurring in the fall of 2017. The estimated project cost is $113,000. The cost of the project will be funded by special assessment. The estimated cost is $1,000 to $3,000 per residential equivalent unit. The assessments 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 improvement includes the following: 5105 to 5121 W. 48`h St, 5 10 1 to 5125 W. 49`h St, 5004 to 5048 Edinbrook La, 4800 to 4845 Westbrook La, and 5101 to 5121 Milpond PI. *Your receipt of this notice is an indication that property whose ownership is listed to you is among those properties which are considered to benefit from the improvement The City Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close of the hearing. To comment, you may: Write to City of Edina, Attention Engineering, 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina, MN 55439 Email to mail (d)EdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering Attend the public hearing and offer comments Components of the project are: • 6 -ft to 20 -ft Wood Wall • Designed and managed by Mn /DOT • Mn /DOT funds 90% and residents assessed 10% of cost • Special Assessment is based on a 3- tiered system Visit our website to learn more about this project http: / /edinamn.gov /index.php ?section= noise -wall. 0 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 2811721240088 2811721240089 2811721240090 Michael J & Carrie M Kohlman Judy Justice Donald Hayward 5105 48th St W 5109 48th St W 5113 48th St W Edema, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240091 2811721240092 2811721310036 Timothy Sipprell Gary E & Colleen M Wondra Le Truong 5117 48th St W 5121 48th St W 5101 49th St W Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721310068 2811721240107 2811721310039 Gina L Smith Tyler Van Brunt Gerald O'Brien 5105 49th St W 5108 49th St W 2625 Valley Road Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Maple Plain, MN 55359 2811721240106 2811721240105 2811721310040 Michelle S & Neal T Anderson Bert L Hetletveot Gerald O'Brien 5112 49th St W 5116 49th St W 2625 Valley Road Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Maple Plain, MN 55359 2811721240104 2811721310038 2811721240069 Anthony Wagner Robert Kimmell Kent D Bishop 5120 49th St W 8046 Doug Hill 5004 Edinbrook La Edina, MN 55436 San Diego, CA 92127 Edina, MN 55436 20721240053 2811721240111 2811721240054 Richard Barsamian Amy & Kevin Kuemmel Peter Kennedy 5005 Edinbrook La 5008 Edinbrook La 5009 Edinbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240073 2811721240055 2811721240074 David Colwell Ronaele Sayre William C Hartupee 5012 Edinbrook La 5013 Edinbrook La 5016 Edinbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240056 2811721240075 2811721240060 John & Nicole Evenson Andrea & Christopher Piepho Thomas McCoy & Patricia Dupree 5017 Edinbrook La 5020 Edinbrook La 5021 Edinbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240067 2811721240057 2811721240066 Richard J & Sarah T Manser James J & Noelle K Starr Dean Carlson 5024 Edinbrook La 5025 Edinbrook La 5028 Edinbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240058 2811721240065 2811721240059 NfIW Mukta Sathe Rick Matson Abby Eckstein 50WEdinbrook La 5032 Edinbrook La 5033 Edinbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240064 2811721240063 2811721240062 Todd & Karen Swenson Andrea D Piepho Kathryn Dangers 5036 Edinbrook La 5040 Edinbrook La 5044 Edinbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240061 2811721240087 2811721240076 Robert A Bryan Michael & Amber Mrnak Jill & Mark Scullard 5048 Edinbrook La 4800 Westbrook La 4801 Westbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240077 2811721240078 2811721240079 Homepride, Inc. Deidre Corniea A J Kubitschek & P D Cernin 1500 211th Ave NW 4811 Westbrook La 4813 Westbrook La Oak Grove, MN 55011 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240080 2811721240081 2811721240082 Barbara Carlson Dennis L Knoer Cahereine Jordan 4817 Westbrook La 4821 Westbrook La 4825 Westbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240100 2811721240083 2811721240084 Reza Tehrani Jeffrey & Joan Meitrodt David & Patti Bruflodt 9007 15th Ave S 4833 Westbrook La 4837 Westbrook La Bloomington, MN 55425 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 721240108 2811721240085 2811721240086 Nelva Kahler Michael Beck Mary P Reed 4840 Westbrook La 4841 Westbrook La 4845 Westbrook La Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240099 2811721240110 2811721240096 Doris Skold Ian H & Julia M Abel T E Lampe & K C Holmquist- Fischer 5101 Millpond PI 5104 Millpond PI 5108 Millpond PI Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 2811721240095 2811721240101 2811721240094 Norberto & Lisa Moran Stephen J Grossman Scott Kelley 5112 Millpond PI 5113 Millpond PI 96 Woodland Cir Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55424 2811721240102 2811721240093 2811721240103 Oscar C Huerta E Joseph Kurth James Dodge 5117 Millpond PI 5120 Millpond PI 5121 Millpond PI Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 • • To: City Council From: Karen M. Kurt Date: May 19, 2015 Subject: Vision Edina Strategic Vision and Framework Report Action Requested: Approve Vision Edina Strategic Vision and Framework Report. Information / Background: o I le r Cn ° � ��<<�APORA1�� • IHHR Agenda Item #: VIII. A. Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Vision Edina was a broad -based and inclusive community visioning process. The Vision Edina initiative worked with local residents, organizations and businesses to explore: • What is unique and important about living in Edina? • Where is there opportunity or need to evolve or change? • How can we continue to progress to keep the city relevant and attractive to current and future residents and businesses? What is our competitive edge? A summary of the Vision Edina process is outlined in the table below. All of the related reports and data can be found online at www.edinamn.gov /vision. Phase I (August) I Background research on existing and future trends. Cities o f the Future: Community Phase 2 (September) Local 'think -tank' process that included 115 residents and stakeholders, exploration of future options. Scenarios of the Future Report Phase 3 (October to Community workshops on future options. Over 30 workshops were held and almost November) 600 surveys collected. Community Engagement Report Phase 4 (December Analysis of results and defining the emerging shared vision. Initial results were shared to January) during a work session on January 20, 2015 Draft Strategic Vision and Framework Community review and approval. Presentations were made to all of the Boards and Phase 5 (February to ;Commissions for input. An open house was held on April 14, 2015. Suggested edits April) lbased on the feedback were shared with City Council at a work session on April 21, 2015. City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Page 2 Staff received the attached HRRC Advisory Communication on Vision Edina after the Council work session last month. Staff consulted with Future iQ on the recommendations and have provided comments on how each recommendation was handled. Once approved, Vision Edina's Strategic Vision and Framework Report will serve as an important foundation for other strategic planning efforts, including the City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Plans. When finished, Vision Edina will replace Edina Vision 20/20, which was developed in 2000 and updated in 2003. Attached: • Vision Edina Strategic Vision and Framework Report • Strategic Vision and Framework Report Text Copy With Edits • HRRC Advisory Communication �� • �s [J y 'a• F'; • : • . tip. �, w.... a • vA Y 7 w �I NI _ r _.n fir•^ ,�. .e v. - _... - - •• `.....ter. " °zr -— s ..s,,...,.. VISION EDINA «# CITY OF EDINA STRATEGIC VISION and FRAMEWORK f, This vision and framework is an outcome of the broad -based community engagement and visioning process, conducted between September and December 2014 May 2015 CITY OF EDINA STRATEGIC VISION AND FRAMEWORK VISION EDINA This vision and framework is an outcome of the broad -based community engagement and visioning process, conducted between September and December 2014. May 2015 future -IQ P A R T N E R S "N fit Ct •'�� riff! y. N t \t } t� • • • VISION EDINA Vision Edina represents a fresh look at the future for the City of Edina. This work builds on the previous Edina Vision 20120 planning work that was undertaken 1S years ago. Since that time, the world has changed. We are subject to stronger external trends and forces, and we face renewed pressures with increasing population and developmental pressure. The future we face is one filled with greater uncertainty, more rapid pace of change and emerging new opportunities. Vision Edina allows us to step back and look again at the big picture, and decide how we continue to evolve to remain a relevant, competitive and progressive city. Vision Edina is a long -term strategic framework that helps our community understand and guide the important decision - making that will impact Edina's future. This framework lays out the key issues identified by our community, which we need to be focusing our attention and resources on, over the coming years. The Vision Edina work and publications have been developed through a broad -based and inclusive community visioning process conducted in 2014. • It is proposed that the current City of Edina mission statement remain largely unchanged. This is a potent and relevant mission statement that has, and continues to, serve the City well. • "Our mission is to provide effective and valued public services, maintain a sound public infrastructure, offer premier public facilities and guide the development and redevelopment of lands, all in a manner that sustains and improves the health and uncommonly high quality of life enjoyed by our residents and businesses:' Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 3 4 EDINAIS VISION STATEMENT Edina holds a well- earned reputation as a city of choice. It is the model of a successful, mature, and progressive urban community, that strives to lead in a modern and evolving world. We maintain our heritage and attractiveness, and afford our residents the highest quality of life, while actively embracing the future. The features that define our future community include: Inclusive and Connected • Our community embraces diversity and cherishes the contributions of all residents and stakeholders. • Our community offers an enticing mix of residential development that retains and builds upon our strong foundation of single- family housing, but also includes a dimension of higher density multi- family options, especially for the young and the old. • We strive to promote a healthy demographic mix that builds on the tradition of multi - generational • families, and also provides entry opportunities for new people seeking to raise families, start businesses, and join our quality community. • Our residents enjoyawide range of transportation options that foster mobilityand interconnectedness. • Our cohesive neighborhoods are able to retain their unique individual character, while being linked seamlessly together into the broader fabric of our city. • Our residents benefit from close access to parks and other gathering spaces where they can regenerate, connect with community members and enjoy nature. Built -to -Scale Development • Our community has worked hard to create an innovative and long -term comprehensive development policy that strikes the right balance between renewal and progress, and protection and preservation. • Our development policy promotes partnerships between developers and community members and encourages innovative ideas. • Our community's commercial and retail base has been significantly enhanced through the creation of more mixed -use locations, carefully woven throughout our neighborhoods. • We have proactively developed planning procedures and policies that allow the character of our neighborhoods to be preserved and enhanced. Local development reflects the aspirations of both neighborhood residents and the community as a whole. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 • • Sustainable Environment • Edina has focused and invested in world -class citywide resource management systems, built around the leading principles of environmental sustainability. • We have substantially reduced our overall environmental impact and significantly increased our resource use efficiency. • Our planning has integrated the best - proven standards of sustainable building and environmental stewardship into all aspects of our city planning and building codes. • Our community continues to treasure and protect our public spaces and parks. We have enhanced our biodiversity and natural ecosystems, which in turn support and purify our natural environment. A Community of Learning • Edina has continued to evolve as a highly engaged community, where residents share the responsibility for decision making and working collectively toward the common vision. • We recognize and appreciate the significant value of our education system, and we continue to work and invest to strengthen and grow this key community asset. • As technology and society have evolved, so has our prized education system. We have a high quality, future- oriented education system, which undeniably prepares our students to thrive in an increasingly competitive and globalized world. • As residents, we never tire in our pursuit of knowledge and understanding. We collectively promote the value of engagement and education, and we ensure that we have the capacity as a community to • understand and remain agile in a fast changing and complex world. Future - Oriented • As a community, we continually look forward and are always working to remain competitive, relevant and innovative. We stand on the foundation of our traditions, but are not afraid to adapt and change as the city evolves. • Our city leaders and organizations are actively engaged in regional leadership and in ensuring the interests of Edina are represented at the level of the Twin Cities metropolis, but also beyond. • Edina is willing to use its, resources, and expertise to apply new ideas and technology, and we actively invest ourselves in finding and creating innovative solutions to the emerging challenges of living in a major city. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 5 STRATEGIC FOCUS AREA, ISSUES AND ACTIONS Eight key strategic focus areas have emerged through the Vision Edina process. These areas are built from the key drivers and issues identified early in the Vision Edina process, and have carried through the extensive community and stakeholder engagement process. These focus areas, and the attendant issues and actions, represent emerging priority areas that can both leverage and guide the future evolution of our city. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list, and in no way displaces the underlying foundational work that continues on our key areas of infrastructure, community services, governance and fiscal management. Rather, these strategic focus areas represent key emerging priorities, and reflect the core drivers of our future that can be summarized in the categories of Balancing Edina's Redevelopment, and Enhancing Our Community Fabric and Character. 6 Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 1. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MIX The issue of residential property development has been repeatedly raised throughout the Vision Edina process. The City has been faced with a number of redevelopment pressures and challenges across numerous areas. Residents strongly favor a continued focus on the single- family housing nature of the majority of the city neighborhoods, but there is increasing concern about the trend and impact of so- called 'teardowns' on the community. There is also recognition of some need for additional multi - family options to create more diversity in housing affordability. This would provide increased options at all stages of life and attract younger residents. SSUES • Residential neighborhoods continue to serve as the defining characteristic of the city, and there is a • high desire to protect and enhance such neighborhoods. • Residents take a great deal of pride in their homes, and express concern about the escalating • redevelopment pressures facing some neighborhood areas. • Edina continues to face competition from neighboring communities that claim to offer a similar quality of life while also offering more available land for development. • The community must balance the needs of the families that have defined its character, with an aging population that desires to 'age in place.' STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Further encourage the development of neighborhood associations and the overall neighborhood concept. Define the unique character and brand of each of the well - established neighborhoods, and explore innovative planning guidelines to allow preservation and enhancement of the desired neighborhood visual appeal. • Pursue further planning and development options that protect and locate key amenities, such as parks and community facilities, within the neighborhood framework to allow neighborhood centers and focus points to further evolve. • Continue to explore options for new multi - family housing throughout the city in mixed -use areas and near public spaces, including areas such as Southdale, Pentagon Park and Grandview. • Work to create affordable housing options close to transit, shopping and employment centers. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 7 8 Z. TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Participants in the Vision Edina process expressed a strong desire to continue to expand a variety of transportation options to both reduce dependency on automobiles and enhance the community's work and life balance, and ease of connectivity. Walking, biking, and transit options represent key amenities that help residents feel connected to their community, and improve the overall quality of life. A diversity of transportation options is also highly preferred among younger residents. However, such options have met resistance in some areas, largely a reflection of a 'not in my back yard' reaction. The larger community sentiment of support should be highlighted to advance policies and developments deemed to be in the larger public good. ISSUES • The community's infrastructure continues to age and be stressed by increasing traffic volume. . • The majority of Edina's employed population works outside of the city and is therefore reliant on the connectivity and maintenance of the roadway system for their livelihood. • The community overall is highly supportive of increased diversity and integration of transportation and local access options. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Undertake community education and promotion to highlight the broad support and benefits of more diverse transportation options, and particularly to highlight the support expressed across multiple age demographics. • Work to expand transit options to Edina, and ensure that Edina residents do not become further isolated from the larger transit infrastructure. • Develop an integrated long -term plan that lays out a future - oriented and ambitious transportation network that covers multiple modes of transportation, and takes into account potential impacts of future technology on transportation modes and corridors. • Continue to promote and develop the sidewalk, trail and bike networks to improve accessibility and connectivity throughout the city and beyond. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 • 3. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT MIX Edina has traditionally embraced commercial development along a relatively narrow corridor along France Avenue, and originally anchored by Southdale Center. While this practice has been successful and has led to additional growth along France Avenue, Vision Edina participants have expressed a desire for easier and more proximal access to small retail options and other amenities. Many participants of the engagement process highlighted the unique and appealing experience of the 50th & France district. New development opportunities can build upon this example and model to develop neighborhood nodes of an appropriate scale in other locations across the city. ISSUES • Edina has historically favored large -scale commercial development. Best practice and community desire has moved toward also including smaller -scale models. • • Residents currently feel somewhat disconnected from common amenities, including banking, dry cleaning, groceries and pharmacies - and this is an issue likely to be exacerbated with an aging population. The community has significant redevelopment opportunities in the Pentagon Park, Grandview, and Southdale areas, but as of yet, there appears to be no clear consensus as to the best and most appropriate uses and ultimate outcomes. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • In light of the escalating developmental pressures facing the Council and City, the City should as a priority renew its broader land use plan. This plan should examine and consider the future broad fabric of the community, and begin to define key nodes of higher- density mixed use, and potential nodes of small -scale commercial opportunity, embedded in more of a neighborhood context. • More consideration of scale and appropriate mixed use could be used in the review of new commercial development proposals, especially to take into account the compounding impact of numerous developments in close proximity and the concerns about this overall impact on streetscape, environmental aspects, transportation and utilities and services. • The community should further examine and consider the development of small neighborhood -based business nodes to provide a range of local amenities and services. • Edina should continue to explore strategies that promote the continued vitality of existing core retail zones around Southdale Center, and also actively pursue economic development strategies targeting specific professional services clusters. These approaches could enhance the core economic underpinning of the local economy. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 9 911 4. LIVE AND WORK Edina's community has a large number of high -wage earners, most of whom commute to areas outside the city for work. Therefore, Edina is highly dependent on the vitality of the regional economy to maintain prosperity. At the same time, the community also recognizes a growing desire, especially among young professionals, to both live and work in the same location. There is evidence to suggest this represents part of a larger societal trend, and could have important implications to the future location appeal of Edina. The city currently offers limited opportunities to do so, as a mismatch exists between the wage - earning potential of many of the employment opportunities in the community and the relatively high cost of quality housing. However, the city is very well endowed with recreation facilities, which offers excellent outdoor and sporting amenities. ISSUES • Many of the city's residents commute outside of the city for work. This creates a disincentive to . young professionals who may aspire to live and work in Edina. • The community does not possess significant spaces for collaborating, start -ups or telecommuting. • Many people who work in Edina cannot afford to live in the community. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Edina should support the development of a start -up or entrepreneurial climate in the city, and bring together key stakeholders to develop an integrated economic development strategy. • The community should consider the inclusion of incubators or co- working spaces in any new redevelopment projects and in mixed -use proposals. • The City should promote the development of a mix of commercial amenities, including restaurants and cultural amenities, which are attractive to young families and professionals and can further act as connection points or hubs within the fabric of neighborhoods and development areas. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 • S. EDUCATIONAL FOCUS Edina Public Schools are recognized as one of the principal assets of the community. The school district and its institutions are routinely recognized as among the best in the state and nation. Participants in the Vision Edina process routinely singled out quality education as one of the defining characteristics of their preferred future. However, respondents also expressed a desire for the greater use of technology in the classroom, expansion of cultural and 'globally- focused' learning opportunities and the promotion of lifelong learning. SSUES • Education policy and funding are largely a state matter, placing the City in an advocacy and partnership role. • Respondents desire an educational system that maintains high quality while also embracing new techniques and technologies. A balance needs to be struck. • • While Edina Public Schools and other local institutions adeptly provide K -12 education, lifelong learning and other cultural education opportunities requires leadership from a variety of community institutions. • STRATEGIC ACTIONS • The community should promote a culture of learning among all of its residents, and continue to find ways to explore, understand and present best practices across a range of topics. In particular, it is important to expand the scope beyond regional expertise and explore best practices and emerging trends on a global scale. • The City should continue to foster its productive working partnership with Edina Public Schools. These two entities represent some of the key leverage points in the city, and combining their influence could accelerate the progress on key initiatives. Similar partnerships should be established with the Richfield and Hopkins school districts. • The City and school district should continue to explore future opportunities for expanded partnerships between the schools and existing employment opportunities within the community, thereby helping develop career paths and local workforce development. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 11 12 6. POPULATION MIX The demographics of the Twin Cities are constantly changing as new residents are attracted by strong regional employment prospects, economic tailwinds and quality cultural and public amenities. Edina is well positioned to attract many of these new residents because of its high quality of life. Edina's population is also undergoing a generational transformation as its population continues to age, creating a new group of active senior citizens with different housing and amenity needs. Developing an effective balance in each of these areas is critical to ensuring future sustainable growth. ISSUES • The perception of an 'Edina Bubble' carries with it the stigma of being an exclusive and exclusionary community. • The relatively high cost of housing is a barrier to entry into the community, especially for younger families. 40 • The needs of an aging population are often in conflict with the preferences of the younger residents the community seeks to attract. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • The City should expand its work with local school districts to expose students and parents to a variety of cultural experiences. This will serve to foster a global mindset while also cementing the education system as a key population draw. • Edina's civic organizations should promote a welcoming image of the city. These efforts should be equally directed toward new residents and businesses. These organizations should also take a lead role in publicizing the city's cultural amenities. • The City should continue to prioritize amenities that meet the needs of residents of all ages. The City should continue discussions about the effects of an aging population, as referenced in the Vision 20120 process. Similar efforts should be used to engage young adults, including high school students. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 • 7. ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP Participants in the Vision Edina process were more supportive of environmentally responsible policies and practices than any other issue area. There is a growing awareness of the impact that the built environment has on the natural environment, and the individual and collective responsibility we all have toward good environmental stewardship. Community residents and stakeholders believe that Edina can take an active and ambitious internal and regional leadership role in embedding environmental stewardship principles through actions such as promoting more comprehensive recycling, smart building and energy efficiency practices. These themes couple well with the parallel benefits in smarter urban planning, increased transportation options and application of technology. ISSUES • Residential and commercial developers have little incentive to balance environmentally friendly building practices • with market pressures, or in fact to provide leading -edge examples of energy efficient and environmentally sensitive construction. • Currently, residential waste removal and other environmental services are poorly coordinated, and in some cases multiple providers are serving the same streets, contributing to noise, environmental impact and inefficiencies. • The need for green spaces is well recognized, but the use of these areas currently follows more traditional 'green lawn' approaches rather than integrated habitat zones. • Developmental pressures are likely to continue to place increased demands on the City's infrastructure and contribute to concerns about decline in environmental quality in the community. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Develop a comprehensive city -wide environmental management plan that explores and includes best practices in water management, biodiversity, green space management, street scape enhancement and waste management. • Partner with energy and utility service providers to educate residents on the importance of energy efficiency in their daily living and promote energy efficiency and smart building practices at all City -owned properties. This could include well - established practices such as publishing data on the carbon emission, waste levels and recycling levels. • Identify a series of environmental flagship pilot projects to bring stakeholders together and begin exploring creative solutions. Examples could include: waste collection and management across the city; recycling and green waste management; environmental overlays on development projects such as Pentagon Park; and utilization of available areas such as Fred Richards Park as community gardens and biodiversity spaces. • Develop incentives for individual households to take an active role in the overall city responsibilityfor environmental management, including reducing nutrient loads in run -off, local recycling and efficient resource usage. Vision Edina — Strategic Vision Framework — May 2015 13 14 8. REGIONAL LEADERSHIP Edina has long been recognized as one of the premier communities in the Twin Cities and is home to many influential individuals. The City has been historically viewed as somewhat progressive in its development policies and practices. The existing phase of redevelopment and the expanding pressures from the surrounding metropolitan area highlights the need and opportunity for Edina to continue as an innovator, seeking and implementing creative solutions to local and regional issues. ISSUES • City leadership has rightfully focused on many local issues, in large part driven by changing community needs and expectations. In recent years, City officials have also been playing an important role in some significant regional discussions. • Edina's size may limit its influence when compared to larger neighboring communities, its popularity • with respect to redevelopment has presented a unique set of challenges and the opportunity to lead on some issues previously not encountered in the larger metropolitan area. • The community has regional economic importance, but its cultural importance has been somewhat more limited. However, there is potential for Edina to have some destination value as a regional cultural center. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • City leaders should actively advocate for Edina's interests in the Met Council and other regional bodies. In addition, the City should form particularly close functional connections with the immediately neighboring cities, as they share many aspects and challenges. • City leaders should continue to inform residents on the impact of issues of regional importance and work to better integrate an understanding of the importance of being an active participant, and leader, in the larger regional system • City leaders and residents should collaborate to discover, develop and apply new best practices in environmental sustainability, aging in place, educational quality and other broad areas of consensus. These efforts will ensure that Edina builds the future intelligence capacity to retain a future - focused worldview, and act as an example and role model to other cities in North America. Vision Edina — Strategic Vision Framework — May 2015 0 CONCLUSION The Vision Edina process has presented an opportunity for the community to come together and explore the longer -term future. The current period of intense redevelopment, which is occurring within Edina, represents an important juncture in the community's history and evolution. This is coupled with a more gradual generational shift, as the predominant Baby Boom generation moves through the demographic system. The resultant situation is where Edina stands poised before some significant choices about future trajectory and outcomes. This has been well articulated in the Vision Edina process. The community has chosen a path forward that represents some significant change and reinvention, but without losing touch with the important family values and rationale that has always defined Edina as a community. The path ahead is not without its challenges and will require careful balancing of differing priorities, aspirations and desires. The collective decision - making process required to move forward will set Edina apart as an intelligent, engaged, thoughtful and forward - looking city. It will require maturity . and patience on behalf of the citizens and leadership, and recognition that the complex resident mix, which makes Edina interesting, also brings with it differing opinions and perspectives. Understanding the importance of the common good over personal self- interests will be critical to build alignment around important future shaping decisions and actions. The population and leadership of Edina possess and exhibit more than sufficient knowledge and experience to guide the City toward the vibrant and balanced future desired by the residents and stakeholders. Vision Edina - Strategic Vision Framework - May 2015 15 FOR MORE INFORMATION � VISION EDINA The Vision Edina initiative has aimed to define a shared vision for the City of Edina. The vision and strategic framework is the outcome of a broad -based and inclusive community visioning process. The engagement portion of this important planning process ran from Septemberto December2014, and gathered significant community input. From a strategic planning perspective, Vision Edina examines the issues that have been identified as having the highest priority within the community. The initiative examined future trends in cities across North America and the world, and how generational values are changing. This was also linked to local aspirations, values and desires for the future. This process provides a clearer understanding of what people might be looking for in Edina in 2030 and beyond. Vision Edina has represented an opportunity for all residents to have a say and contribute to creating the shared future vision. Vision Edina is part of the overall community process to update the long -term vision for the City of Edina. Vision Edina will also serve as an important foundation for other strategic efforts, such as the City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Plans. The City of Edina partnered with Future iQ Partners, an international consultancy company, to design and facilitate the process. For more information on the Vision Edina project and the City of Edina, please contact: t V r e ..s Scott H. Neal, City Manager City of Edina 952 - 826 -0415 SNeal @EdinaMN.gov www.EdinaMN.gov VISION f utu rC-A Q �= EDINA, .% P A R T N E R S 0 Vision Edina CITY OF EDINA nnSTRATEGIC VISION and FRAMEWORK This vision and framework is an outcome of the broad -based community engagement and visioning process,— conducted between September and December 2014 Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 • May la4uaf� -2015 Vision Edina Vision Edina represents a fresh look at the future for the City of Edina. This work builds on the previous Edina Vision 20/20 planning work that was undertaken 15 years ago. Since that time, the world has changed. We are subject to stronger external trends and forces, and we face renewed pressures with increasing population and developmental pressure. The future we face is one filled with greater uncertainty, more rapid pace of change and emerging new opportunities. Vision Edina allows us to step back and look again at the big picture, and decide how we continue to evolve to remain a relevant, competitive and progressive city. Vision Edina is a long -term strategic framework that helps our community understand and guide the important decision - making that will impact Edina's the sfuture. This framework lays out the key issues identified by our community, which we need to be focusing our attention and resources on, over the coming years. The Vision Edina work and publications have been developed through a broad -based and inclusive community visioning process conducted in 2014. It is proposed that the current City of Edina mission statement remains largely unchanged. This is a potent and relevant mission statement that has, and continues to, serve the City well. "Our mission is to provide effective and valued public services, maintain a sound public infrastructure, offer premier public facilities and guide the development and redevelopment of lands, all in a manner that sustains and improves the health and uncommonly high quality of life enjoyed by our residents and businesses." Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 0 0 0 EDINA'S VISION STATEMENT (double page spread) Edina holds a well- earned reputation as a city of choice. It is the model of a successful, mature, and progressive urban community, that strives to lead in a modern and evolving world. We maintain our heritage and attractiveness, and afford our residents the highest quality of life, while actively embracing the future. The features that define our future community include: Inclusive and Connected • Our community embraces diversity and cherishes the contributions of all residents and stakeholders. • Our community offers an enticing mix of residential development that retains and builds upon our strong foundation of single - family housing, but also includes a dimension of higher density multi - family options, especially for the young and the old. • We strive to promote a healthy demographic mix that builds on the tradition of multi - generational families, and also provides entry opportunities for new people seeking to raise families, start businesses, and join our quality community. • Our residents enjoy a wide range of transportation options that foster mobility and • interconnectedness. • Our cohesive neighborhoods are able to retain their unique individual character, while being linked seamlessly together into the broader fabric of our city. • Our residents benefit from close access to parks and other gathering spaces where they can regenerate, connect with community members and enjoy nature. Built -to -Scale Development • Our community has worked hard to create an innovative and long -term comprehensive development policy that strikes the right balance between renewal and progress, and protection and preservation. • Our development policy promotes partnerships between developers and community members and encourages innovative ideas. • Our community's commercial and retail base has been significantly enhanced through the creation of more mixed -use locations, - carefully woven throughout our neighborhoods. • We have proactively developed planning procedures and policies that allow the character of our neighborhoods to be preserved eterted and enhanced;_ aad4Local development reflects the aspirations of -both neighborhood - residents and the community as a whole. Sustainable Environment Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 • Edina has focused and invested in world -class citywide resource management systems, built around the leading principles of environmental sustainability. • We have substantially reduced our overall environmental impact and significantly increased our resource use efficiency. • Our planning has integrated the best - proven standards of sustainable building and environmental stewardship into all aspects of our city planning and building codes. • Our community continues to treasure and protect our public spaces and parks. We have enhanced our biodiversity and natural ecosystems, which in turn support and purify our natural environment. A Community of Learning • Edina has continued to evolve as a highly engaged community, where residents share the responsibility for decision making and working collectively toward the common vision. • We recognize and appreciate the significant value of our education system, and we continue to work and invest to strengthen and grow this key community asset. • As technology and society have evolved, so has our prized education system. We have a high quality, future- oriented education system, which undeniably prepares our students to thrive in an increasingly competitive and globalized world. • As residents, we never tire in our pursuit of knowledge and understanding. We collectively promote the value of engagement and education, and we ensure that we have the capacity as a community to understand and remain agile in a fast changing and complex world. Future - Oriented As a community, we continually look forward and are always working to remain competitive, relevant and innovative. We stand on the foundation of our traditions, but are not afraid to adapt and change as the city evolves. Our city leaders and organizations are actively engaged in regional leadership and in ensuring the interests of Edina are represented at the level of the Twin Cities metropolis, but also beyond. Edina is willing to use its, resources, and expertise to apply new ideas and technology, and we actively invest ourselves in finding and creating innovative solutions to the emerging challenges of living in a major city. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 • 40 • STRATEGIC FOCUS AREA, ISSUES and ACTIONS Eight key strategic focus areas have emerged through the Vision Edina process. These areas are built from the key drivers and issues identified early in the Vision Edina process, and have carried through the extensive community and stakeholder engagement process. These focus areas, and the attendant issues and actions, represent emerging priority areas that can both leverage and guide the future evolution of our city. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list, and in no way displaces the underlying foundational work that continues on our key areas of infrastructure, community services, governance; and fiscal management. Rather, these strategic focus areas represent key emerging priorities, and reflect the core drivers of our future that can be summarized in the categories of 'Balancing Edina's Redevelopment =, and Enhancing Our Community Fabric and Character'. (Note: be sure to add italics for titles) • Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 40 Formatted: Font: Italic Formatted: Font: Italic Balancing Edina's Redevelopment (header text for this section 1-4) 1. Residential Development Mix The issue of residential property development has been repeatedly raised throughout the Vision Edina process. The City has been faced with a number of redevelopment pressures and challenges across numerous areas .9f the eity. Residents strongly favor a continued focus on the single - family housing nature of the majority of the city neighborhoods, but there is increasing concern about the trend and impact of so- called 'teardowns' on the community. There is also recognition of some need }e � develep FneFe for additional multi- family options to create more diversity in housing affordability. This would provide increased options at all stages of life and attract younger residents. le E)FdeF W sewe t' af*OFdability• Issues • Residential neighborhoods continue to serve as the defining characteristic of the city, and there is a high desire to protect and enhance such neighborhoods. • Residents take a great deal of pride in their homes, and express concern about the escalating redevelopment pressures facing some neighborhood areas. • Edina continues to face competition from neighboring communities that claim to offer a similar quality of life while also offering more available land for development. • The community must balance the needs of the families that have defined its character, with an aging population that desires to 'age in place.' Strategic Actions • Further encourage the development oft4se neighborhood associations and the overall neighborhood concept. Define the unique character and brand of each of the well - established neighborhoods, and explore innovative planning guidelines to allow preservation and enhancement of the desired neighborhood visual appeal. • Pursue further planning and development options that protect and locate key amenities, such as parks and community facilities, within the neighborhood framework to allow neighborhood centers and focus points to further evolve. • Continue to explore options and eppei4wnitieq for new multi - family aeyelepmen;: housing throughout the city in mixed -use areas and near public spaces, including areas such as eppeiunities in t4e Southdale, Pentagon Park, and Grandview. aeeas,and en the appFE)PFiate fFinge5 of ether ...imed- and publie • Work to create affordable housing options close to transit, shopping and employment centers. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 0 • • 2. Transportation Options Participants in the Vision Edina process expressed a strong desire to continue to expand a variety of transportation options to both reduce toe dependency on automobiles, but also to enhance the community's work and life balance, and ease of connectivity. Walking -a+4 biking, and transit options - represent a key amenitiesy that help residents feel connected to their community, and improve the overall quality of life. A diversity of transportation options is also highly preferred among younger residents. However, such options have met resistance in some areas, largely a reflection of a 'not in my back yard' reaction. The larger community sentiment of support should be highlighted to advance policies and developments deemed to be in the larger public good. Issues • The community's infrastructure continues to age and be stressed by increasing traffic volume. • The majority of Edina's employed population works outside of the 6city and is therefore reliant on the connectivity and maintenance of the roadway system for their livelihood. • The community overall is highly supportive of increased diversity and integration of transportation and local access options. Strategic Actions • Undertake community education and promotion, to highlight the broad support and • benefits of more diverse transportation options, and particularly to highlight the support expressed across multiple age demographics. • rend..,, ♦e %A.geFl( aeri....ly with MetFe T-Fa sit Work to expand transit options to Edina, and ensure that Edina residents do not become further isolated from the larger transit infrastructure. • Develop an integrated long -term plan that lays out a future= orientated and ambitious transportation network that covers multiple modes of transportation including bikeways, and takes into account potential impacts of future technology on transportation modes and corridors. • Continue to promote and develop the sidewalk, trail and bike networks to improve accessibility and connectivity throughout the 6city, and beyond. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 • 3. Commercial Development Mix Edina has traditionally embraced commercial development along a relatively narrow corridor along France Avenue, and originally anchored by Southdale CenterMall. While this practice has been successful and has led to additional growth along France Avenue, Vision Edina participants have expressed a desire for easier and more proximal access to small retail options and other amenities. Many participants of the engagement process highlighted the unique and appealing experience of the 50`h &ard France distriapfeekw4. New development opportunities can build upon this example and model to develop neighborhood nodes of an appropriate scale; in other locations across the Ecity. Issues Edina has historically favored large -scale commercial development. Best practice and community desire has moved towards also including smaller -scale models. Residents currently feel somewhat disconnected from common amenities, including banking, dry cleaning, groceries, and pharmacies —and this is an issue likely to be exacerbated with an aging population. The community has significant redevelopment opportunities in the Pentagon Park, Grandview, and Southdale areas, but as of yet, there appears to be no clear consensus as to the best and most appropriate uses and ultimate outcomes. Strategic Actions • In light of the escalating developmental pressures facing the Council and City, the City should as a priority renew its broader land use plan. This plan should examine and consider the future broad fabric of the community, and begin to define key nodes of higher_ density mixed use, and potential nodes of small -scale commercial opportunity, embedded in more of a neighborhood context. • More consideration of scale and appropriate mixed use could be used in the review of new commercial development proposals, especially to take into account the compounding impact of numerous developments in close proximity, and the concerns about this overall impact on streetscape, environmental aspects, transportation and utilities and services. • The community should further examine and consider the development of small neighborhood -based business nodes; to provide a range of local amenities and services. • Edina should continue to explore strategies that promote the continued vitality of existing core retail zones around Southdale CenterMa-14, and also actively pursue economic development strategies targeting specific professional services clusters. These approaches could enhance the core economic underpinning of the local economy. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 U C7 • • 4. Live and Work`Mork P ^a I& Q ^1 ^^ ^e Edina's community has a large number of high-wage earners, most of whom commute to areas outside the city for work. Therefore, Edina is highly dependent on the vitality of the regional economy to maintain prosperity. At the same time, the community also recognizes a growing desire, especially among young professionals, to both live and work in the same location. There is evidence to suggest this represents part of a larger societal trend, and could have important implications to the future location appeal of Edina. The cGity currently offers limited opportunities to do so, as a mismatch exists between the wage- earning potential of many of the employment opportunities in the community and the relatively high cost of quality housing. However, the cQty is very well endowed with recreation facilities, which offers excellent outdoor and sporting amenities. Issues • Many of the city's residents commute outside of the city for work. This creates a disincentive to young professionals who may aspire to live and work in Edina. • The community does not possess significant spaces for collaborating, start-ups or telecommuting. • Many people who work in l(ey sta4 in GFganizatiens aeFess Edina cannot afford to live in the community, ^ eati & %^ "�. Strategic Actions • • Edina should support the development of a start-up or entrepreneurial climate in the city, and bring together key stakeholders to develop an integrated economic development strategy. • The community should consider the inclusion of incubators or co- working spaces in any new redevelopment projects and in mixed -use proposals. • The City should promote the development of a mix of commercial amenities, including restaurants and cultural amenities, which are attractive to young families and professionals and can further act as connection points or hubs within the fabric of neighborhoods and development areas. ..I.. ..+ nteF^ Vision Edina - FINAL strategic vision framework - May 2015 • - Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.5 ", No bullets or numbering Enhancing Our Community Fabric and Character (header text for this section 5-8) S. Educational Focus Edina Public Schools are recognized as one of the principal assets of the community. The school district and its institutions are routinely recognized as among the best in the state and nation. Participants in the Vision Edina process routinely singled out quality education as one of the defining characteristics of their preferred future. However, respondents also expressed a desire for the greater use of technology in the classroom, expansion of cultural and 'globally- focused' learning opportunities; and the promotion of lifelong learning. Issues Education policy and funding are largely a state matter, placing the City in an advocacy and partnership role. Respondents desire an educational system that maintains high quality while also embracing new techniques and technologies. A balance needs to be struck. While Edina Public Schools and other local institutions adeptly provide K -12 education, lifelong learning and other cultural education opportunities requires leadership from a variety of community institutions. Strategic Actions The community should promote a culture of learning among all of its residents, and continue to find ways to explore, understand and present best practices across a range of topics. In particular, it is important to expand the scope beyond regional expertise and explore best practices and emerging trends on a global scale. The City should continue to foster itsthe4 productive working partnership with Edina Public Schools. These two entities represent some of the key leverage points in the cjQty, and combining their influence could accelerate the progress on key initiatives. Similar partnerships should be established with the Richfield and Hopkins school districts. The City and school district should continue to explore future opportunities for expanded partnerships between the schools and existing employment opportunities within the communityAy, thereby helping develop career paths and local workforce development. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 10 • • 6. Population Mix The demographics of the Twin Cities are constantly changing as new residents are attracted by strong regional employment prospects, economic tailwinds and quality cultural and public amenities. Edina is well positioned to attract many of these new residents because of its high quality of life. Edina's population is also undergoing a generational transformation as its population continues to age, creating a new group of active FetiFe ,eRt senior citizens with different housing and amenity needs. Developing an effective balance in each of these areas is critical to ensuring future sustainable growth. Issues • The perception of an 'Edina Bubble' carries with it the stigma of being an exclusive and exclusionary community. • The relatively high cost of housing is a alse viewed as a peFeeived barrier to entry into the community, especially for younger families. • The needs of an aging population are often in conflict with the preferences of the younger residents the community seeks to attract. Strategic Actions • The City should expand its work with local school districts to expose students, and parents, to a variety of cultural experiences. This will serve to foster a global mindset, • while also cementing the education system as a key population draw. • Edina's civic organizations should promote a welcoming image of the city. These efforts should be equally directed towards new residents and new businesses. These organizations should also take a lead role in publicizing the c6ity's cultural amenities. • The City should continue to prioritize amenities that meet the needs of residents of all ages. The City should continue discussions about the effects of an aging population, as referenced in the Vision 20/20 process. Similar efforts should be used to engage young adults, including high school students. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 11 • 7. Environmental Stewardship Participants in the Vision Edina process were more supportive of environmentally responsible policies and practices than any other issue area. There is a growing awareness of the impact that the built environment has on the natural environment, and the individual and collective responsibility we all have towards good environmental stewardship. Community residents and stakeholders believe that Edina can take an active and ambitious internal and regional leadership role in embedding environmental stewardship principles, through actions such as promoting more comprehensive recycling, smart building; and energy efficiency practices. These themes couple well with the parallel benefits in smarter urban planning, increased transportation options; and application of technology. Issues • Residential and commercial developers have little incentive to balance environmentally friendly building practices with market pressures, or in fact to provide leading--edge examples of energy efficient and environmentally sensitive construction. • Currently, residential waste removal and other environmental services are poorly coordinated, and in some cases FesultiRg iR multiple providers are serving the same streets, contributing to noise, environmental impact and inefficiencies. • The need for green spaces is well recognized, but the use of these areas currently follows more traditional 'green lawn' approaches rather than integrated habitat zones. • Developmental pressures are likely to continue to place increased demands on the City's infrastructure and contribute to concerns about decline in environmental quality in the community4y. Strategic Actions • Develop a comprehensive city-wide environmental management plan; that explores and includes best practices in terms water management, biodiversity, green space management, street scape enhancement prese vat and waste management. • Partner with energy and utility service providers to educate residents on the importance of energy efficiency in their daily living; and promote energy efficiency and smart building practices at all City -owned properties. This could include well - established practices such as publishing data on the carbon emission, waste levels and recycling levels. • Identify a series of environmental flagship pilot projects to bring stakeholders together and begin exploring creative solutions. Examples could include: waste collection and management across the city; recycling and green waste management; environmental overlays on development projects such as Pentagon Park; and; utilization of available areas such as Fred Richards Park as community gardens and biodiversity spaces. • Develop incentives for individual households to take an active role paA in the overall city responsibility forte environmental management, including reducing nutrient loads in run -off, local recycling and efficient resource usage. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 12 • • • • 8. Regional Leadership Issues Edina has lone been recognized as one of the premier communities in the Twin Cities- and is home to many influential individuals. The City has been historically viewed as somewhat progressive in its development policies and practices., ...a was fully built out. The existing phase of redevelopment and the expanding pressures from the surrounding metropolitan area -, 94ee highlights the need and opportunity for Edina to continue eRee again ^^A_Fg_ as an innovator, seeking and implementing creative solutions to local and regional issues • City leadership has rightfully focused on many local issues in large part driven by changing community needs and expectations. In recent years City officials have also been playing an important role in some significant regional discussions. • Gity leadership has geneF lly feeused an l• al issues, n l • a L •+ e r an � �, �=r per..I, ..,. (NQT& David ete say that . R to -h.,., - • ` ""��'„�, a the ^i +n Edina's size may limit its - influence when compared to larger neighboring communities, its popularity with respect to redevelopment has presented a unique set of challenges and the opportunity to lead on some issues previously not encountered in the larger metropolitan area. The community has regional economic importance, but its cultural importance has been somewhat more limited. However, there is potential for Edina to have some destination value as a regional cultural center.. beyond just as a residential abode Strategic Actions • City leaders should actively advocate for Edina's interests in the Met Council and other regional bodies. In addition, the City should form particularly close functional connections with the immediately neighboring cities, as they share many aspects and challenges. • City leaders should continue to inform residents on the impact of issues of regional importance, and work to better integrate an understanding of the importance of being an active participant, and leader, in the larger regional system • City leaders and residents should collaborate to discover, develop and apply new best practices in environmental sustainability, aging in place, educational quality, and other Vision Edina - FINAL strategic vision framework - May 2015 13 Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Bold Formatted: Highlight Formatted: Highlight broad areas of consensus. These efforts will ensure that Edina builds the future intelligence capacity to retain a future - focused worldview, and act as an example and role model to other cities in North America. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 14 • C • CONCLUSION The Vision Edina process has presented an opportunity for the community to come together and explore the longer -term future. The current period of intense redevelopment, which is occurring within Edina, represents an important juncture in the community's history and evolution. This is coupled with a more gradual generational shift, as the predominant Baby Boom generation moves through the demographic system. The resultant situation is where Edina stands poised before some significant choices about future trajectory and outcomes. This has been well articulated in the Vision Edina process. The community has chosen a path forward that represents some significant change and reinvention, but without losing touch with the important family values and rationale that has always defined Edina as a community. The path ahead is not without its challenges and will require careful balancing of differing priorities, aspirations and desires. The collective decision_ making process required to move forward will set Edina apart as an intelligent, engaged, thoughtful and forward:-looking city. It will require maturity and patience on behalf of the citizens and leadership, and recognition that the complex resident mix, which makes Edina interesting, also brings with it differing opinions and perspectives. Understanding the importance of the common good over personal self- interests will be critical to build alignment around important future shaping decisions and actions. The population and leadership of Edina possess and exhibit more than sufficient knowledge and experience to guide the City toward the vibrant and balanced future desired by the residents and stakeholders. Vision Edina — FINAL strategic vision framework — May 2015 15 • FOR MORE INFORMATION (back page - Add City of Edina Logo and FiQ) Vision Edina The Vision Edina initiative has aimed to define a shared vision for the City of Edina. INeste44y-t4e City of Edip�, «he vision and strategic framework is the outcome of a broad -based and inclusive community visioning process. The engagement portion of this important planning process ran from September to December 2014, and gathered significant community input. From a strategic planning perspective, Vision Edina examines the issues that have been identified as having the highest priority within the community. The initiative examined future trends in cities across North America and the world, and how generational values are changing. This was also linked to local aspirations, values and desires for the future. This process, and the supvey "^"'''` `^r'"''ed in this Fepei * enables provides a clearer understanding of what people might be looking for in Edina in 2030 and beyond. Vision Edina has represented an opportunity for all residents to have a say; and contribute to creating the shared future vision. Vision Edina is part of the overall community process to update the long -term vision for the City of Edina. Vision Edina will also serve as an important foundation for other strategic efforts, such as the City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Plans. The City of Edina partnered with Future iQ Partners, an international consultancy company, to design and facilitate the process. For more information on the Vision Edina project and the City of Edina, please contact: FtScott H. Neal, Ascent City Manager City of Edina 952 - 826 -0415 KKwFtPlidki^" " "' ^ ^6Neal @EdinaMN.gov www.EdinaMN.gov Vision Edina —FINAL strategic vision framework— May 2015 16 • • 101 o Fe., t1d Cn IHHH To: City Council From: Human Rights and Relations Commission Cc: Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager Date: May 6, 2015 Subject: Vision Edina Feedback Attachments: None Action Requested: Consider the following recommended changes to the Vision Edina Strategic Vision and Framework. Recommendation: General Statement: There are multiple references in the Strategic Vision and Framework to affordable housing in Edina. However, the Strategic Actions do not specifically address affordable housing. The Human Rights and Relations Commission believes that-an overarching housing policy should include an expression of the need for continuously considering the affordable housing component in the exploration of all housing strategies. Creation of a vibrant multicultural community, where people from across the social- economic spectrum live and work together, should be a basis for all further housing policy decisions. Page 4, Edina's Vision Statement, Second Bullet Point under Inclusive & Connected: The statement that the community offers a mix of residential development that includes "higher density multi - family options, especially for the young and the old" does not adequately describe the fact that a lot of families with children live in apartments and townhomes in Edina. Suggested edit: strike the phrase "especially for the young and old." STAFF COMMENTS: While it is true that families live in multi - family housing, the intent here was to call out the fact that housing options for the young and old are particularly limited. Page 7, # 1. Residential Development Mix Original Text: "Residential neighborhoods continue to serve as the defining characteristic of the city, and there is a high desire to protect and enhance such neighborhoods." The word protect has connotations of protecting from another, and we think the original intention was to preserve the character of older neighborhoods. Suggested Edit: Change "protect" to "preserve" and remove the word high. Page 2 O (Ndfi STAFF COMMENTS: We left the descriptive "high" because we feel that the data supports this conclusion. We changed "protect" to "preserve ". Page 7. #1. Residential Development Mix Original phrase: "there is also recognition of some need to develop more multi - family options in order to serve the needs of young professionals and our senior citizens, and create some diversity in housing affordability." We are concerned about the words "some" and "young professionals." Suggested Edit: "There is recognition of the need to develop more multi - family options in order to serve the needs of Edina residents and to increase diversity in housing affordability." STAFF COMMENTS: The latest version, while not the exact wording proposed here, reflects a similar intent. Page 7. # 1. Residential Development Mix, Last Bullet Point under Strategic Actions: Mentioning neighborhoods is unnecessarily specific and limiting. Additionally, should / could the document utilize a different word than "fringes" (which has a negative connotation) for describing exploration of multi - family development opportunities on the "fringes" of other mixed -use areas and public spaces? Is this an issue of zoning? Suggested edit: "Continue to explore options for new multi - family development opportunities throughout the City of Edina in mixed -use areas and public spaces." STAFF COMMENTS: We think it is beneficial to identify key areas where multifamily housing could be appropriate. We replaced with "Continue to explore options for new multi - family development opportunities throughout the City of Edina in mixed -use areas and near public spaces, including areas such as Southdale, Pentagon Park and Grandview" Page 7, # 1. Residential Development Mix, Strategic Actions: There is no action that references how to manage the teardown issue. Should there be something else in the action plan to address this issue? STAFF COMMENTS: The Framework only suggests a few strategic actions but does not attempt to be inclusive of all issues or actions. This type of detail is more appropriate for the Comprehensive Plan. Page 10. #4. Live and Work. Introductory Paragraph and First Bullet Point under Issues: Identifying "young professionals" as the ones who want to live and work in the same area misses the larger issue that many different people would like to live and work in the same area. The "relatively high cost of quality housing" as noted in the introductory paragraph impacts more than "young professionals." ISuggested Edit: Remove both uses of the phrase "young professionals." • • 0 Page 3 Ok, Fe til � O fir, � timer. ,y, t� IHNN STAFF COMMENTS: While it is true that many people may want to live and work in the same area, this trend is especially documented in the millennial generation. Page 10. #4. Live and Work. Third Bullet Point under Issues: Original text: "Many key staff in organizations across Edina cannot afford to live in the community, creating a service disconnect ". First, the issue is broader than "key staff in organizations" across Edina and includes employees who work in Edina who cannot afford to live in the community. Second, the phrase "service disconnect" is vague and should be omitted. Finally, there is no action to address this issue of the lack of availability of affordable housing. Suggested edit: "Many people who work in Edina cannot afford to live in the community." STAFF COMMENTS: Changed. Page 12, #6 Population Mix, Second Bullet Point under Issues: The high housing cost isn't a perceived barrier ... it is a barrier. There isn't much housing stock in certain cost ranges, and teardowns are exacerbating this issue. There is no action to address this issue of the lack of availability of affordable housing. Suggested edit: "The high cost of housing is a barrier..." STAFF COMMENTS: Changed. Also added a strategic action related to affordable housing under Residential Mix. Page 12. #6 Population Mix, First Bullet Point under Strategic Actions: The first strategic action should remove the reference to the school district because this is a community -wide issue. Suggested edit: The City of Edina, in partnership with Edina Public Schools, should continue to expose students, parents, and other residents to a variety of cultural experiences. This will serve to foster a global mindset, while also cementing the education system as a key population draw. STAFF COMMENTS: Changed. To: Mayor and City Council From: Susie Miller Braemar Arena and Braemar Field General Manager Date: May 19, 2015 �91�l� o e 1888 Agenda Item #: VIII.B. Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information ❑x Subject: Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club and Edina Hockey Association Memorandum of Understanding Action Requested: None. Information only. Information / Background: In 2013 Braemar Arena re- evaluated the priority use of the facility. At the time Braemar Arena was able to meet nearly 100% of ice rental needs for Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club ( BCLFSC), but was only able to meet less than 50% of the ice rental needs for the Edina Hockey Association (EHA). At the July 16, 2013 council meeting staff recommended a priority use agreement which allocated ice to both groups based on participant residency. At that meeting the City Council directed staff to meet with BCLFSC and EHA to come up with an agreement for facility usage. Staff conducted three meetings with representatives of both organizations to attempt to come to an agreement about facility utilization and ice allocation. After no agreement was reached, staff recommended to City Council at their Aug. 5, 2013 meeting a scenario of ice utilization based on information learned at the previous meetings. The City Council passed the following motion on Aug. 5, 2013 "159 hour reduction in 2013/2014 during prime season (Sept. 16 to March 15); 159 hour reduction in 2014/2015 during prime season (Sept. 16 to March 15), with staff directed to determine a process to evaluate future allocation of ice time to be recommended by the Park Board and adopted by the City Council, to be completed by the second City Council meeting in May of 2015 ". Since 2013 Braemar Arena implemented the 159 hour reduction. Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club did not need to purchase additional ice at other facilities during the past two seasons. Braemar Arena also added a seasonal fourth sheet of ice. This addition has increased Braemar Arena's ability to meet the ice needs of EHA to just over 60 %. Both associations have been happy with the ice scheduling over the past two seasons. Attached is a Memorandum of Understanding signed by both parties in agreement of the use of Braemar Arena. This agreement, while non - binding, shows support of both programs and the importance of Braemar Arena being their home facility. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 This item is presented as information only and will also be presented as information only at the May 19, • 2015 City Council meeting. Susie Miller, Braemar Arena and Braemar Field General Manager will be present at the Park Board meeting to answer any questions. Attachment: Memorandum of Understanding — BCLFSC and EHA • • • BRAEMAR ICE ARENA MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This Memorandum of Understanding ( "MOU "), made and entered into this 7th day of May, 2015, is by and among the City of Edina ( "City "), Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club ( "BCLFSC "), and the Edina Hockey Association ( "EHA ") (collectively "the Parties "). 1. Ice Rental BCLFSC. Subject to the execution of annual ice rental agreements, BCLFSC may use the Braemar ice arena in accordance with the following schedule: September 16, 2015 to March 15, 2016: Monday 3:00 - 6:50 p.m.; Syncro 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. Tuesday 3:00 - 6:10 p.m. Wednesday 3:00 - 6:50 p.m.; Syncro 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. Thursday 6:00 - 6:50 p.m. Friday 3:00 - 4:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 - 10:20 a.m. Sunday Syncro 2:40 - 7:40 p.m. The City reserves the right to limit or change the BCLFSC's ice time for special events, including the Cake Eater, Invitational, Riemann, and the O'Connor tournament. BCLFSC will use the East Arena with the exception of Monday -Friday during January and February when BCLFSC will use the South Arena. This will be reevaluated in April each year by EHA and BCLFSC. The switch of arenas each year in January and February will occur every year for the term of this MOU unless BCLFSC and EHA agree otherwise. BCLFSC is guaranteed the same ice schedule and number of hours each year as they have during the 2015 -2016 season. BCLFSC must turn back ice they do not want prior to November 1 each year. However, it is not a use it or lose it. For example, if BCLFSC gives up Monday ice for a year, they still have first rights to those times the following year, but not to exceed the time allotted in the 2015 -2016 season.. 2. Ice Rental EHA. EHA has the first right to schedule all other ice not used by BCLFSC and the Edina High School. 3. Term. The Term of this MOU is September 16, 2015 through March 15, 2020. The Parties will meet in April of each year to discuss the term of this MOU. 181582v1 4. Non - Binding. This Memorandum of Understanding is an expression of intention is and does not create a legally binding obligation upon the Parties. This Non - Binding Memorandum of Understanding is a guide to the preparation of a contract. 0 C7 written. WITNESSETH, the parties hereto execute this MOU on the date and year first above CITY OF EDINA Scott Neal, City Manager BRAEMAR CITY OF LAKES FIGURE S CIMB B: Its ) �2r3tcs' EDINA HOC Y ASS IATION By: ,f �� Z i811 c< e/ w OA 1/0 et Its Pfl -S .1014 f 2 lslss2vl To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: May 19, 2015 �91NA,11�r'(I� k � o � ��CORPOAA��� • IHHH Agenda Item #: VIII. C. Subject: Resolution No. 2015 -45 Accepting Various Grants & Donations Action Requested: Adopt Resolution. Information / Background: Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ In order to comply with State Statutes, all donations to the City must be adopted by a resolution approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donation. I have prepared the attached resolution detailing the various donors, their gifts and the departments receiving donations for your consideration. Attachments: Resolution No. 2015 -45 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -45 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 Art Center Elizabeth Goff 24 12" Pottery Bats Ingrid Sundstrom - Lundegaard 27 Art Books Sue Sheet Ozeri Stainless Steel Scale Pinstripes Bowling Bocce Bistro Ballroom C & Heavy Hors D'Ouevers Reception Dated: May 19, 2015 Debra A. Mangen, 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 May 19, 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of City Clerk • 0 • To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Eric Roggeman, Finance Director �<)3. A, f o e7, • ,,�Y)AFY7RA�F�I i 18813 Agenda Item #: VIII. D Action Discussion ❑ Date: May 19, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Resolution No. 2015 -51 Providing For The Sale Of Bonds, Series 2015A And Series 2015B Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 2015 -5 I Providing for the Sale of $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A and $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B Information / Background: The $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A has four purposes: 1) $6,795,000 is for local street improvements and will be repaid with special assessments. 2) $2,115,000 is for water utility improvements and will be repaid with water revenue. 3) $3,440,000 is for storm utility improvements and will be repaid with storm revenue. 4) $2,590,000 is for parking improvements at 50th & France and will be repaid with special assessments. The $2,205,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B is to finance improvements at Braemar Golf Course, including reconstruction of the driving range, Par 3 course, and clubhouse renovations. Debt service on this issue will be paid from golf enterprise revenues. The results of the bond sale will be presented to the City Council at the June 16 Council meeting by the City's Financial Advisors; Ehlers Inc. ATTACHMENT: Resolution 2015 -51 Pre -Sale Report for $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A and $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN SS424 REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Paget Resolution No. 2015 -51 0 Resolution Providing for the Sale of $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A, and $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A and $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B (the "Bonds "), to finance various infrastructure and recreation projects in the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ( "Ehlers "), as its independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is therefore authorized to solicit proposals in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting, Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 7:00 on June 16, 2015, for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 0 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. Approved this 19th day of May, 2015. 0 Debra A. Mangen, 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 May 19, 2015 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 20 City Clerk • �J • • EHLEIRIS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE May 19, 2015 Pre -Sale Report City of Edina, Minnesota $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A And $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B }�••�JI�'y r''FS) Prepared by: Mark Ruff Senior Municipal Advisor And Nick Anhut Municipal Advisor 1- 800 -552 -1171 1 www.ehiers- inc.com Executive Summary of Proposed Debt Proposed Issue: $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A (the "2015A Bonds ") and $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B (the "2015B Bonds ") collectively called the "Bonds ". Purposes: The proposed 2015A Bonds includes financing for the following purposes: • $8.3 million for 2015 street reconstruction projects. Debt service will be paid from special assessments levied from 2017 to 2031 from the City's Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund. Estimated capitalized interest of $268,000 is included to offset bond interest payments until the assessments are levied. • $2.5 million in Water System improvements related to 2015 street reconstruction projects. Debt service will be paid from water revenues. • $4.5 million in Storm Sewer improvements related to 2015 Street reconstruction projects and the promenade phase 4. Debt service will be paid from storm sewer revenues. • $2.5 million for 50th & France parking improvements. Debt service will be paid from special assessments levied from 2016 to 2035. Estimated capitalized interest of $40,000 is included to offset bond interest payments until the assessments are levied. The proposed 2015B Bonds includes financing for clubhouse, driving range and course improvements to the Braemar Golf Enterprise. The City will also use up to $120,000 in cash to fund private activity portions of the project related to the lease arrangement with Tin Fish. Debt service will be paid from enterprise revenues. Authority: The Series 2015A Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429, 444 and 475. The Series 2015B Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and Edina's special law Chapter 655 — H.F. No. 1403, which allows Edina to "pledge for the payment of general obligation bonds issued to finance the acquisition or betterment of municipal recreational facilities, and interest thereon, any defined portion or all of the revenues to be derived from the operation of such facilities and of any then existing recreational facilities." Due to this authority, your Bond Attorney recommends that the City separate this purpose into its own distinct issue. The special law exempts these types of issues from net debt limits. The City will also need to set aside a debt service reserve equal to one year of debt payments in its internal funds pursuant to the special law. The Series 2015A issue will not count against the City's debt limit because Chapter 429 allows cities to issue debt without limitation as long as at least 20% of the project is expected to be paid from assessments and Chapter 444 allows cities to issue debt without limitation as long as debt service is expected to be paid from water and sewer revenues. The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which its full faith, credit and taxing powers are pledged. Presale Report May 19, 2015 City of Edina, Minnesota Page 1 • • • • Term /Call Feature: The 2015A Bonds are being issued for a 21 year term in total. Principal on the Bonds will be due on February 1 in the years 2016 through 2036. Interest is payable every six months beginning February 1, 2016. The 2015B Bonds are being issued for a 16 year term. Principal will be due on February 1 in the years 2017 through 2031. Interest is payable every six months beginning February 1, 2016. The Bonds maturing on and after February 1, 2025 will be subject to prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1, 2024 or any date thereafter. Bank Qualification: Because the City is issuing more than $10,000,000 in tax- exempt obligations during the calendar year, the City will be not able to designate the Bonds as "bank qualified" obligations. Rating: The City's most recent bond issues were rated "AAA" by Standard & Poor's and "Aaa" by Moody's. The City will request a new rating for the Bonds. Method of Sale /Placement: In order to obtain the lowest interest cost to the City, we will solicit competitive bids for purchase of the Bonds from regional and national financing institutions. We have included an allowance for discount bidding equal to 0.7% of the principal amount of the 2015A Bonds, and 1.0% of the principal amount of the 2015B Bonds. The discount is treated as an interest item and provides the underwriter with all or a portion of their compensation in the transaction. If either series of bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount (maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to lower your borrowing amount. Premium Bids: The current generational low in interest rates has caused concerns amongst investors as to the impacts to the value of existing bonds in the case interest rates generally increase in the future. When interest rates rise, the value of existing bonds generally falls. In order to mitigate the decline in value of existing bonds, many investors are demanding "premium" pricing structures. A premium is achieved when the coupon for any maturity exceeds the yield, resulting in a price greater than the face value. The amount of the premium varies, but it is not uncommon to see premiums for new issues in the range of 2.00% to 10.00% of the face amount of the issue. This means that an issuer with a $2,000,000 offering may receive bids that result in proceeds of $2,040,000 to $2,200,000. For either issue of bonds we can be directed to use the premium to reduce the size of the issue or increase the net proceeds for the project. The adjustments may slightly change the true interest cost of the original bid, either up or down. You have the choice to limit the amount of premium in the bid specifications. This may result in fewer bids, but it may also eliminate large adjustments on the day of sale and other uncertainties. Review of Existing Debt: We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find that, other Presale Report May 19, 2015 City of Edina, Minnesota Page 2 Presale Report May 19, 2015 City of Edina, Minnesota Page 3 • 0 • than the HRA's 2005 Bonds, there are no refunding opportunities at this time other than advance refunding issues which the City has chosen not to undertake in the past and may not meet the City's debt policy savings thresholds. We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the City's outstanding debt and will alert you to any future refunding opportunities. Basis for Based on our knowledge of your situation, your objectives communicated to us, Recommendation: our advisory relationship as well as characteristics of various municipal financing options, we are recommending the issuance of general obligation bonds through a competitive sale process as a suitable financing option because: - Given the City's high bond ratings and stature in the marketplace, this is the most overall cost effective option for the low interest rates that still maintains future flexibility for the repayment of debt. You do not expect to prepay the Bonds in the next eight to nine years. - This method is consistent with your existing practices and policies to finance these types of projects with this type of debt issue. Continuing Disclosure: Because the City has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt (including this issue) and this issue is over $1,000,000, the City will be agreeing to provide certain updated Annual Financial Information and its Audited Financial Statement annually as well as providing notices of the occurrence of certain "material events" to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the "MSRB "), as required by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The City is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing bonds, and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare and file the reports. Arbitrage Monitoring: Because the Bonds are tax- exempt securities /tax credit securities, the City must ensure compliance with certain Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules throughout the life of the issue. These rules apply to all gross proceeds of the issue, including initial bond proceeds and investment earnings in construction, escrow, debt service, and any reserve funds. How issuers spend bond proceeds and how they track interest earnings on funds (arbitrage /yield restriction compliance) are common subjects of IRS inquiries. Your specific responsibilities will be detailed in the Officers' Certificate prepared by your Bond Attorney and provided at closing. You have retained Ehlers to assist you with compliance with these rules. Risk Factors: Special Assessments: The City expects to pay the PIR and Parking portion of debt service with special assessment revenue. The City is expecting $900,000 of the assessments will be prepaid. If the City receives significantly more in prepaid assessments, or the assessments are not levied as scheduled, the City may have to levy taxes to pay debt service on the 2015A Bonds. Utility Revenue: The City expects to pay the Bond debt service with utility funds. If utility revenue is inadequate, the City may have to levy taxes to pay debt service on the 2015A Bonds. Golf Revenue: The City expects to pay the Bond debt service with revenues from the Braemar Golf enterprise. If golf revenue is inadequate, the City may have to Presale Report May 19, 2015 City of Edina, Minnesota Page 3 • 0 • C • This presale report summarizes our understanding of the City's objectives for the structure and terms of this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital markets conditions change, we may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this financing to achieve results consistent with the City's objectives. Presale Report May 19, 2015 City of Edina, Minnesota Page 4 utilize other enterprise funds or levy taxes to pay debt service on the 2015B Bonds. Other Service Providers: This debt issuance will require the engagement of other public finance service providers. This section identifies those other service providers, so Ehlers can coordinate their engagement on your behalf Where you have previously used a particular firm to provide a service, we have assumed that you will continue that relationship. For services you have not previously required, we have identified a service provider. Fees charged by these service providers will be paid from proceeds of the obligation, unless you notify us that you wish to pay them from other sources. Our pre -sale bond sizing includes a good faith estimate of these fees, so their final fees may vary. If you have any questions pertaining to the identified service providers or their roles, or if you would like to use a different service provider for any of the listed services, please contact us. Bond Attorney: Dorsey & Whitney LLP Paying Agent: U.S. Bank National Association Rating Agency: Standard & Poor's and Moody's This presale report summarizes our understanding of the City's objectives for the structure and terms of this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital markets conditions change, we may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this financing to achieve results consistent with the City's objectives. Presale Report May 19, 2015 City of Edina, Minnesota Page 4 Proposed Debt Issuance Schedule Pre -Sale Review by City Council May 19, 2015 Distribute Official Statement: Week of June 1, 2015 Conference with Rating Agency: Week of June 1, 2015 City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: June 16, 2014 Estimated Closing Date: July 15, 2014 Attachments Sources and Uses of Funds Proposed Debt Service Schedule Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed With Bond Sale Ehlers Contacts Financial Advisors: Mark Ruff (651) 697 -8505 Nick Anhut (651) 697 -8507 Disclosure Coordinator: Wendy Lundberg (651) 697 -8540 Financial Analyst: Alicia Gage (651) 697 -8551 The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the City Council at their home address or e- mailed for review prior to the sale date. Presale Report May 19, 2015 City of Edina, Minnesota Page 5 0 0 • City of Edina, Minnesota $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A Issue Summary Assumes Current Market Non -BQ "AAA" Rates plus 15bps Total Issue Sources And Uses Dated 07/15/2015 1 Delivered 07/15/2015 Issue PIR Water Storm Parking Summary Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $6,795,000.00 $2,115,000.00 $3,440,000.00 $2,590,000.00 $14,940,000.00 Planned Issuer ErLity contribution 1,000,000 00 412 500.00 1,166,000.00 2,578,500.00 Prepaid Assessments 900,000.00 900,000.00 Total Sources $8,695,000.00 $2,527,500.00 $4,606,000.00 $2,590,000.00 $18,418,500.00 Uses Of Funds Total Underwriter's Discount 0.700% --- __._.......__.___._ _ — -- 47,565.00 - - - - - -- 14,805.00 24,080.00 18,130.00 - 104,580.00 Costs of Issuance 53,213.83 16,563.27 26,939.77 20,283.13 117,000.00 Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund 267,698.56 _.....- _....__.._._ - - - - -- — - — 39,668.22 307,366.78 Deposit to Project Construction Fund 8,325,001.00 2,495,585.00 4,555,230.00 2,512,375.00 17,888,191.00 Rounding Amount „___-_ J_...__ -._......_1,521.61 546.73 (249,77) — (456.35 1,362.22 Total Uses $8,695,000.00 $2,527,500.00 $4,606,000.00 $2,590,000.00 $18,418,500.00 Series 2015A GO Bonds - P I Issue Summary 1 5/12/2015 1 9:08 AM •LEADERS D City of Edina, Minnesota $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A Issue Summary Assumes Current Market Non -130 "AAA" Rates plus 15bps Debt Service Schedule Total $14,940,000.00 - $3,527,723.70 $18,467,723.70 (307,366.78) $18, 160, 356.92 $2,335,563.28 $3,798,893.64 $12,627,195.00 $13,860,745.30 (1,233,55030) Significant Dates Dated 7/15/2015 Fr ist Coupon Date _ 2/01/2016 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars Water Storm Sewer 8.524 Yeats ...2.7702316% Average Coupon Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I CIF Net New D/S Revenues Revenues 105% of Net Assessments Levy /(Surplus) 02/01/2016 565,000.00 0.5500/ 185,066.20 750,066.20 (134,036.78) 616,029.42 234,425.78 381,60164 - - 02/O1/2017 630,000.00 0.900% 336,810.00 966,810.00 (173,330.00) 793,480.00 234,497.50 381,122.50 186,753.00 195,673.58 (8,920.58) 02/01/2018 1,020,000.00 1.200% 331,140.00 1,351,140.00 1,351,140.00 232,697.50 378,197.50 777,257.25 858,825.16 (81,567.91) 02/01/2019 1,035,000.00 1.4500/c 318,900.00 1,353,900.00 1,353,900.00 235,297.50 379,297.50 776,270.25 858,825.17 (82,554.92) 02/01/2020 1,050,000.00 1.6501/6 303,892.50 1,353,892.50 1,353,892.50 232,325.00 379,512.50 779,157.75 858,825.16 (79,667.41) 02/01/2021 1,070,000.00 1.8501/. 286,567.50 1,356,567.50 1,356,567.50 233,942.50 378,985.00 780,822.00 858,825.16 (78,003.16) 02/01/2022 1,095,000.00 2.0501% 266,772.50 1,361,772.50 1,361,772.50 235,057.50 382,695.00 781,221.00 858,825.17 (77,604.17) 02101/2023 1,110,000.00 2.2001% 244,325.00 1,354,325.00 1,354,325.00 230,650.00 380,520.00 780,312.75 858,825.16 (78,512.41) 02/01/2024 1,130,000.00 2.3501/6 219,905.00 1,349,905.00 1,349,905.00 230,920.00 377,710.00 778,338.75 858,825.16 (80,486.41) 02/01/2025 1,165,000.00 2.500% 193,350.00 1,358,350.00 1,358,350.00 235,750.00 379,250.00 780,517.50 858,825.15 (78,307.65) 02/01/2026 580,000.00 2.6501/o 164,225.00 744,225.00 744,225.00 - - 781,436.25 858,825.15 (77,388.90) 02/01/2027 595,000.00 2.8000/ 148,855.00 743,855.00 743,855.00 781,047.75 858,825.14 (77,777.39) 02/01/2028 610,000.00 2.9501% 132,195.00 742,195.00 - 742,195.00 - - 779,304.75 858,825.18 (79,520.43) 02/01/2029 630,000.00 3.1500/ 114,200.00 744,200.00 744,200.00 781,410.00 858,825.16 (77,415.16) 02/01/2030 650,000.00 3.300% 94,355.00 744,355.00 744,355.00 78157275 858,825.16 (77,252.41) 02/01/2031 665,000.00 3.450% 72,905.00 737,905.00 737,905.00 774,800.25 858,825.15 (84,024.90) 02/01/2032 690,000.00 3.600% 49,962.50 739,962.50 739,962.50 776,960.63 858,825.16 (81,864.54) 02/01/2033 155,000.00 3.750% 25,122.50 180,122.50 180,122.50 189,128.63 195,673.58 (6,544.96) 02/01/2034 160,000.00 3.850% 19,310.00 179,310.00 179,310.00 188,275.50 195,673.58 (7,398.08) 02/01/2035 165,000.00 3.9001/. 13,150.00 178,150.00 _ 178,150.00 _ 187,057.50 195,673.59 (8,616.09) 02/01/2036 170,000.00 3.950% 6,715.00 176,715.00 - 176,715.00 - - 185,550.75 195,673.58 (10,122.83) Total $14,940,000.00 - $3,527,723.70 $18,467,723.70 (307,366.78) $18, 160, 356.92 $2,335,563.28 $3,798,893.64 $12,627,195.00 $13,860,745.30 (1,233,55030) Significant Dates Dated 7/15/2015 Fr ist Coupon Date _ 2/01/2016 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $127,344.00 Average Life 8.524 Yeats ...2.7702316% Average Coupon Net Interest Cost (NIC) True Interest Cost (TIC) Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes All Inclusive Cost (AIC) Series 2015A GO Bonds - P I Issue Summary 1 5112/2015 1 9:06 AM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 2.8523556% 2.8206087% 2.7256934% 2.9279703% City of Edina, Minnesota $6,795,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A PIR Assumes Current Market Non -BQ "AAA" Rates plus 15bps Debt Service Schedule 0 0 Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I CIF Net New D/S 105% of Total Assessments Levy /(Surplus) 02/01/2016 94,368.56 94,368.56 (94,368.56) 02/01/2017 - - 173,330.00 173,330.00 (173,330.00) - - - 02/01/2018 390,000.00 1.200% 173,330.00 563,330.00 563,330.00 591,496.50 663,151.58 (71,655.08) 02/01/2019 395,000.00 1.450% 168,650.00 563,650.00 563,650.00 591,832.50 663,151.58 (71,319.08) 02/01/2020 400,000.00 1650% 162,922.50 562,922.50 562,922.50 591,068.63 663,151.58 (72,082.96) 02/01/2021 410,000.00 1.850% 156,322.50 566,322.50 - 566,322.50 594,638.63 663,151.58 (68,512.96) 02/01/2022 415,000.00 2.050% 148,737.50 563,737.50 - 563,737.50 591,924.38 663,151.58 (71,227.21) 02/01/2023 425,000.00 2.200% 140,230.00 565,230.00 - 565,230.00 593,491.50 663,151.58 (69,660.08) 02/01/2024 435,000.00 2.350% 130,880.00 565,880.00 - 565,880.00 594,174.00 663,151.57 (68,977.57) 02/01/2025 445,000.00 2.500% 120,657.50 565,657.50 - 565,657.50 593,940.38 663,151.57 (69,211.20) 02/01/2026 455,000.00 2.650% 109,532.50 564,532.50 - 564,532.50 592,759.13 663,151.57 (70,392.45) 02/01/2027 470,000.00 2.800% 97,475.00 567,475.00 - 567,475.00 595,848.75 663,151.57 (67,302.82) 02/01/2028 480,000.00 2.950% 84,315.00 564,315.00 - 564,315.00 592,530.75 663,151.59 (70,620.84) 02/01/2029 495,000.-00 3.150% 70,155.00 565,155.00 - 565,155.00 593,412.75 663,151.57 (69,738.82) 02/01/2030 510,000.00 3.300% 54,562.50 564,562 50 564,562.50 592,790.63 663,151.59 (70,360.97) 02/01/2031 525,000.00 3.450% 37,732.50 562,732.50 562,732.50 590,869.13 663,151.57 (72,282.45) 02/01/2032 545,000.00 3.600% 19,620.00 564,620.00 564,620.00 592,851.00 663,151.58 (70,300.58) Total $6,795,000.00 - $1,942,821.06 $8,737,821.06 (267,698.56) $89470,122.50 $8,893,628.63 $9,947,273.66 (1,053,645.03) Significant Dates Dated First Coupon Date Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars Average Life Average Coupon Net Interest Cost (NIC) True Interest Cost (TIC) Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes All Inclusive Cost (AIC) Series 2015A GO Bonds - P I PIR 1 5/12/2015 1 9:08 AM EHLERS LEADEttS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 7/15/2015 2/01/2016 $67,914.50 9.995 Years 2.8606867% 2.9307233% 2.9117577% 2.7256_934 % — 3.0047684% City of Edina, Minnesota $2,115,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A • Water Assumes Current Market Non -BQ "AAA" Rates plus 15bps Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I Fiscal Total 07/15/2015 - - - - - 02/01/2016 215,000.00 0.550% 19,425.78 234,425.78 234,425.78 08/01/2016 - - 17,248.75 17,248.75 - 02/01/2017 200,000.00 0.900% 17,248.75 217,248.75 234,497.50 08/01/2017 - - 16,348.75 16,348.75 - 02/01/2018 200,000.00 1.200% 16,348.75 216,348.75 232,697.50 08/01/2018 - - 15,148.75 15,148.75 - 02/01/2019 205,000.00 1.450% 15,148.75 220,148.75 235,297.50 08/01/2019 - - 13,662.50 13,662.50 - 02/01/2020 205,000.00 1.650% 13,662.50 218,662.50 232,325.00 08/01/2020 - - 11,971.25 11,971.25 - 02/01/2021 210,000.00 1.850% 11,971.25 221,971.25 233,942.50 08/01/2021 - - 10,028.75 10,028.75 - 02/01/2022 215,000.00 2.050% 10,028.75 225,028.75 235,057.50 08/01/2022 7,825.00 7,825.00 - 02/01/2023 215,000.00 2.200% 7,825.00 222,825.00 230,650.00 08/01/2023 - - 5,460.00 5,460.00 - 02/01/2024 220,000.00 2.350% 5,460.00 225,460.00 230,920.00 08/01/2024 - - 2,875.00 2,875.00 - 02/01/2025 230,000.00 2.500% 2,875.00 232,875.00 235,750.00 Total $2,115,000.00 $220,563.28 $2,335,563.28 - Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $10,861.50 Average Life 5.135 Years Average Coupon 2.0306889% Net Interest Cost (NIC) 2.166996.1% True Interest Cost (TIC) 2.1668148% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.7256934% All Inclusive Cost (AIC) 2.3324942% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 2.0306889% Weighted Average Maturity 5.135 Years Series 2015A GO Bonds - P I Water 1 5/1212015 1 9:08 AM E_HLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE • • City of Edina, Minnesota $3,440,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A Storm Assumes Current Market Non -BO "AAA" Rates plus 15bps Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I Fiscal Total 07/15/2015 2.1670121% - - - - 02/01/2016 350,000.00 0.550% 31,603.64 381,603.64 381,603.64 08/01/2016 - - 28,061.25 28,061.25 - 02/01/2017 325,000.00 0.900% 28,061.25 353,061.25 381,122.50 08/01/2017 - - 26,598.75 26,598.75 - 02/01/2018 325,000.00 1.200% 26,598.75 351,598.75 378,197.50 08/01/2018 - - 24,648.75 24,648.75 - 02/01/2019 330,000.00 1.450% 24,648.75 354,648.75 379,297.50 08/01/2019 - - 22,256.25 22,256.25 - 02/01/2020 335,000.00 1.650% 22,256.25 357,256.25 379,512.50 08/01/2020 - - 19,492.50 19,492.50 - 02/01/2021 340,000.00 1.850% 19,492.50 359,492.50 378,985.00 08/01/2021 - - 16,347.50 16,347.50 - 02/01/2022 350,000.00 2.050% 16,347.50 366,347.50 382,695.00 08/01/2022 - _ _- 12,760.00 12,760.00 - 02/01/2023 355,000.00 2.200% 12,760.00 367,760.00 _ 380,520.00 08/01/2023 - - 8,855.00 8,855.00 - 02/01/2024 360,000.00 2.350% 8,855.00 368,855.00 377,710.00 08/01/2024 - - 4,625.00 4,625.00 - 02/O1/2025 370,000.00 2.59.0% 4,625 00 1 374,625.00 379,250.00 Total $3,440,000.00 $358,893.64 $3,798,893.64 - Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $17,672.89 Average Life 5.137 Years Average Coupon 2.0307582% Net Interest Cost (NIC) 2.1670121% True Interest Cost 00 2.1668646% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.7256934% All Inclusive Cost (AIC) 2.3324811% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 2.0307582% Weijhted Average Maturity 5.137 Years • Series 2015A GO Bonds - P I Storm 1 5/12/2015 1 9:08 AM EHLERS I FADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE City of Edina, Minnesota $2,590,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A Parking Assumes Current Market Non -BQ "AAA" Rates plus 15bps Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I CIF Net New D/S 105% of Total Assessments Levy /(Surplus 02/01/2016 Significant Dates - 39,668.22 39,668.22 (39,668.22) - - - - 02/01/2017 105,000.00 0.900% 72,860.00 177,860.00 177,860.00 186,753.00 195,673.58 (8,920.58) 02/01/2018 105,000.00 1.200% 71,915.00 176,915.00 - 176,915.00 185,760.75 195,673.58 (9,912.83) 02/01/2019 105,000.00 1.450% 70,655.00 175,655.00 - 175,655.00 184,437.75 195,673.59 (11,235.84) 02/01/2020 110,000.00 1.650% 69,132.50 179,132.50 - 179,132.50 188,089.13 195,673.58 (7,584.46) 02/01/2021 110,000.00 1.850% 67,317.50 177,317.50 - 177,317.50 186,183.38 195,673.58 (9,490.20) 02/01/2022 115,000.00 2.050% 65,282.50 180,282.50 - 180,282.50 189,296.63 195,673.59 (6,376.97) 02/01/2023 115,000.00 2.200% 62,925.00 177,925.00 177,925.00 186,821.25 195,673.58 (8,852.33) 02/01/2024 115,000.00 2.350% 60,395.00 175,395.00 175,395.00 184,164.75 195,673.59 (11,508.84) 02/01/2025 120,000.00 2.500% 57,692.50 177,692.50 177,6_92.50 186,577.13 195,673.58 (9,096.46) 02/01/2026 125,000.00 2.650% 54,692.50 179,692.50 179,692.50 188,677.13 195,673.58 (6,996.45) 02/01/2027 125,000.00 2.800% 51,380.00 176,380.00 176,380.00 185,199.00 195,673.57 (10,474.57) 02/01/2028 130,000.00 2.950% 47,880.00 177,880.00 177,880.00 186,774.00 195,673.59 (8,899.59) 02/01/2029 135,000.00 3.150% 44,045.00 179,045.00 179,045.00 187,997.25 195,673.59 (7,676.34) 02/01/2030 140,000.00 3.300% 39,792.50 179,792.50 179,792.50 188,782.13 195,673.57 (6,891.45) 02/01/2031 140,000.00 3.450% 35,172.50 175,172.50 175,172.50 183,931.13 195,673.58 (11,742.46) 02/01/2032 145,000.00 3.600% 30,342.50 175,342.50 175,342.50 184,109.63 195,673.58 (11,563.96) 02/01/2033 155,000.00 3.750% 25,122.50 180,122.50 180,122.50 189,128.63 195,673.58 (6,544.96) 02/01/2034 160,000.00 3.850% 19,310.00 179,310.00 179,310.00 188,275.50 195,673.58 (7,398.08) 02/01/2035 165,000.00 3.900% 13,150.00 178,150.00 178,150.00 187,057.50 195,673.59 (8,616.09) 02/01/2036 170,000.00 3.950% 6,715.00 176,715.00 176,715.00 185,550.75 195,673.58 (10,122.83) Total $2,590,000.00 - $1,005,445.72 $3,595,445.72 (39,668.22) $3,555,777.50 $3,733,566.38 $3,913,471.64 (179,905.26) Significant Dates Dated 7/15/2015 First Coupon Date 2/01/2016 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $30,895.11 Average Life 11.929 Years Average Coupon 3.2543845% Net Interest Cost (NIC) 3.3130670% True Interest Cost (TIC) - _ 3.2766997% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.7256934% All Inclusive Cost (AIC) 3.3593269% Series 2015A GO Bonds - P I Parking 1 5/12/2015 1 9:08 AM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE • is • C] City of Edina, Minnesota $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B Assumes Current Market Non-BQ "AAA" Rates plus 15bps Sources & Uses Dated 0711512015 1 Delivered 07/15/2015 Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $2,185,000.00 Planned Issuer Equity contribution 120,000.00 Total Sources Uses Of Funds $2,305,000.00 Total Underwriter's Discount (1.000%) 21,850.00 Costs of Issuance 30,500.00 . .. ........... . ........ Deposit to Project Construction Fund 2,250,000.00 Rounding Amount 2,650.00 Total Uses $2,305,000.00 Series 2015B GO Bonds - P I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 5/12/2015 1 9:02 AM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE City of Edina, Minnesota $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B Assumes Current Market Non -BQ "AAA" Rates plus 15bps Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I Fiscal Total 07/15/2015 - - - 02/01/2016 28,210.39 28,210.39 28,210.39 08/01/2016 - - 25,907.50 25,907.50 - 02/01/2017 125,000.00 0.900% 25,907.50 150,907.50 176,815.00 08/01/2017 - - 25,345.00 25,345.00 - 02/01/2018 130,000.00 1.200% 25,345.00 155,345.00 180,690.00 08/01/2018 - - 24,565.00 24,565.00 - 02/01/2019 130,000.00 1.450% 24,565.00 154,565.00 179,130.00 08/01/2019 - - 23,622.50 23,622.50 - 02/01/2020 130,000.00 1.650% 23,622.50 153,622.50 177,245.00 08/01/2020 - - 22,550.00 22,550.00 - 02/01/2021 135,000.00 1.850% 22,550.00 157,550.00 180,100.00 08/01/2021 - - 21,301.25 21,301.25 - 02/01/2022 135,000.00 2.050% 21,301.25 156,301.25 177,602.50 08/01/2022 - - 19,917.50 --19,917.50 02/01/2023 140,000.00 2.200% - -.........----- 19,917.50 159,917.50 179,835.00 08/01/2023 - - 18,377.50 18,377.50 - 02/01/2024 145,000.00 2.350% 18,377.50 163,377.50 181,755.00 08/01/2024 - - 16,673.75 16,673.75 - 02/01/2025 145,000.00 2.500% 16,673.75 161,673.75 _ _ 178,347.50 08/01/2025 - - 14,861.25 14,861.25 - 02/01/2026 150,000.00 2.650% 14,861.25 164,861.25 179,722.50 08/01/2026 - - 12,873.75 12,873.75 - 02/01/2027 155,000.00 2.800% 12,873.75 167,873.75 180,747.50 08/01/2027 - - 10,703.75 10,703.75 - 02/01/2028 160,000.00 2.950% 10,703.75 170,703.75 181,407.50 08/01/2028 - - 8,343.75 8,343.75 - 02/01/2029 160,000.00 3.150% 8,343.75 168,343.75 176,687.50 08/01/2029 - - 5,823.75 5,823.75 - 02/01/2030 170,000.00 3.300% 5,823.75 175,823.75 181,647.5.0 08/01/2030 - - - 3,018.75 3,018.75 - 02/01/2031 175,000.00 3.450% 3,018.75 178,018.75 181,037.50 Total $2,185,000.00 - $535,980.39 $2,720,980.39 - Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $19,624.61 Average Life 8.982 Years Averaee Coupon 2.7311644% Net Interest Cost (NIC) 2.8425042% True Interest Cost (TIC) 2.8314347% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.7024857% - - -- - - -. — .._-- .....__.......... - - - - -- All Inclusive Cost (AIC) 3.0144494% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 2.7311644% Weighted Average Maturity 8.982 Years • Series 20156 GO Bonds - P I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 5112/2015 1 9:02 AM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE L� Council Member Resolution No. introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Resolution Providing for the Sale of $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A, and $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $14,940,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A and $2,185,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015B (the "Bonds "), to finance various infrastructure and recreation projects in the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ( "Ehlers "), as its independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is therefore authorized to solicit proposals in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization; FindiM. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 7:00 on June 16, 2015, for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by City Council Member and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following City Council Members voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Dated this 19th day of May, 2015. • City Manager To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: May 19, 2015 Subject: Correspondence Action Requested: No action is necessary. 1 as Agenda Item #: IX. A. Action ❑x Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Attachment: Attached is correspondence received since the last Council meeting. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 • • Heather Branigin From: Mike Minor < mike. minor @stepbystepmontessori.com> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 11:03 AM To: James Hovland Cc: Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com; Bill Neuendorf Subject: $550k for Beacon? Dear Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers, Based on recent council meeting minutes I see the Council is considering some economic development giving associated with the 66th West Beacon Interfaith project, specifically, contributing $550,000 tax payer dollars directly to the project. During the numerous city council meetings I attended regarding this project it was repeatedly stated that the council didn't get involved in understanding the project's financing and it wasn't the council's job to make a determination as to the whether this was a good use of tax payer money. Now you're considering making a contribution to this project in the name of economic development. Let me remind you that the cost per unit of these 350 -450 sq foot studio apartments will be between $200k- $250k. That at its max will only accommodate 39 residents and cost tax payers in excess of $10M. This project is an incredibly inefficient use of tax payer dollars. You now need to understand the implications of these numbers. As a business owner and tax payer in the city of Edina for the last 25 years I fail to see how this will contribute to economic development in the city. The property will generate no sales tax given there is no economic activity at the site, they will pay no property tax given their tax exempt status. What return does the city expect to get on their $550k contribution? What will this money be used for? This project will only potentially benefit 39 people who may or may not be residents of the city, that's $14,102 per resident. That could pay $1175 of rent per month for 1 year per person, that would be a pretty nice apartment for most people. Plus I am aware of no investment the city has made with that high of a cost per resident. Moreover, it is not the responsibility of the city to pick charitable organization winners and losers, make no mistake, this is charity. If the city has so much extra money that it can engage in charitable giving I would suggest they return it to the taxpayers in the city and suggest they donate the money to the charity of their choice. It is not the job of the city to determine the charities in which the residents must contribute. As such you should reject this proposal and look for more efficient uses for this money. Sincerely, Mike Minor Step By Step Montessori Schools 6519 Barrie Road Edina, MN 55435 Heather Branigin From: Diane Rice <jdarice @msn.com> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 1:05 PM To: Mary Brindle; James Hovland; kstauton @EdinaMN.gov; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: Parking plan for Bruce Avenue and Bruce Place May 7, 2015 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, Thank you for listening to the concerns of the neighbors of Bruce Avenue last evening. After the meeting we all spoke and I would like to summerize our thoughts and reply to your comments concerning our project. You mentioned Mayor Hovland that the information about our project had been out there and we had the ability to see and voice our opinions. I do have the June 10, 2014 information that was sent to us about the "proposed local street typical section ". While it does says the streets could be reduced to 24' or 27' depending on sidewalks, it didn't specifically call out which. I did attend 2 of the Living Streets Hearings. I like other concerned citizens, looked at the charts, and the PROPOSED . plans. We all voiced our thoughts and concerns to the members of the engineering and planning staff. There were many neighborhoods that were represented. The staff listened, and said they would pass our concerns on. At the time I went it was after speaking with other neighbors who had heard that there were to be sidewalks on our street and the street was to be narrowed.. The concensus of the neighbors I spoke with was to please leave everything as it is! I learned that there weren't to be sidewalks. I knew that the neighbors on Indianola had signed a petition asking that their street not have sidewalks and a narrower street. We spoke at the meeting of the traffic from 50th that does use our street and of the real elephant in the room, the traffic on 50th. I did ask at that time why our street needed to be narrowed. I spoke with other neighbors who had met with you to talk about our street and the project and was occasionally updated about what had been said. But it wasn't until the project began that we heard that yes, the street was going to be narrowed and there would be parking on one side. On April 22, 2015 1 first called and spoke with Chad Miller and then he suggested I call Mark Nolan. Mark said that the street was being narrowed and that because of that there would be parking on the east side and signs on the west. That was the final plan. He then called me back and said that he misspoke. He said our street wasn't being narrowed to 24' but to 27'. He said there were streets in Edina that were 27' that did have parking on both sides of the street, so there could be another options to the plan. He suggested the petition. Again, this was on April 22, 2015. So at that point we weren't sure if the street was to be 24 or 27 feet. So several of us wrote a note to our neighbors saying that the street was being narrowed to 27' and the parking was to be only on one side.The petition was then walked around. Do you know how hard it is finding 27 families at home? Seventy percent of the 27 people that signed the petition were not aware that the street was being narrowed or that • parking was to be on only one side. They knew that they had to get their sewer lines taken care of, they knew what the project was going to cost, they knew they had been sent a questionnaire about which street lamps they wanted, but they didn't know specifically what was happening to their street. • I know that you and Mark and his staff have worked very hard on the Living Streets program and a plan for the future. I understand a need for future planning as old streets need to be repaired. But I do think it just can't be a cookie cutter plan. As I said in the meeting, ours is a meandering street with an island and a cul du sac that presents its own problems. As it stands right now, I don't believe there would be any street parking on Bruce Place! While I know you feel you have offered our neighbors an input as to our street by having the hearings on the proposed plan, the fact that over 70 percent didn't know what was occurring is telling. Many of our neighbors spend the winter elsewhere. Many are busy families who don't have the time to follow the proposed plans and attend the hearings. So suddenly they feel they are blindsided. Perhaps instead of sending out what the proposed local street typical section would look like it would be better to say, this is what Bruce Avenue is going to look like. And it's not a proposal, it is fact. That would have gotten everyone's attention. And sadly, I doubt there are many of us that go to the website and check what is happening. We live in a busy world, so perhaps good old fashion mail is the best way of reaching us. I know that Cary Schilling and Karen McGalbraith met with several of you and expressed concerns. Might this have been a moment when some more discussion concerning our street and it's quirks could have been considered? I know the McCarys have contacted you about Bruce Place. I realize there are way too many streets in Edina for you all to take an individual look at each one. But when there are residents of the street that have genuine problems with the proposed plan; isn't it worth looking at what the proposed plan would actually do to that street and neighborhood? We, as a neighborhood, have now taken the plan, not proposed plan, seriously. We have all signed the petition asking that you leave the parking as it currently is, on both sides of the street. It appears, as we have now studied the living • street options, that this is possible. Having lived on this street for 34 years, I can say that it works. And the rest of the neighbors agree. I hope that this helps explain our thoughts to the future of our living street and that you will seriously consider our request. May I also ask, when and how will we know what the final determination might be? Sincerely, Diane Rice 5013 Bruce Ave. CJ Heather Branigin From: Pat Olson <patolson5 @icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 2:50 PM To: kstaunton @edinamngov Cc: Edina Mail Subject: City Council Meeting Hi Kevin, I was remiss at the meeting last night in not thanking you for returning my emails, and doing so in such a timely fashion. Others did not respond to my emails. I would like to get some correct information to the Mayor. A number of us on Bruce have been active on this issue. My daughter and I and others on our street attended the info meeting and some the council meeting. I would have liked to have been much more involved, but with two surgical heart procedures and a skin cancer surgery I was deterred. At 80 years old I have seen many changes, and I'm not adverse to change if it benefits the people involved and meets the criteria of common sense along with other criteria. I happen to have loved Bruce Ave. from the day I moved in and I can't tell you how many people over the years that have told me it's their favorite street. I happen to think it's unique in it's beauty and I would like to see it kept that way ... the good Lord willing I hope to spend many more years here. Incidentally, it has some of the greatest neighbors that I could possibly wish for. Thanks Kevin for your attention to this plea. Pat Olson Sent from my iPad • E Heather Branigin • From: Mark K. Nolan Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 8:34 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: FW: Bruce Ave parking issue Please forward to the Mayor and rest of Council. Mark Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner 952- 826 -0322 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0392 ' MNolan(cDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Pat Lawrence [ mai Ito: patlawrence50@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 8:22 AM To: kstauton @edinamn.gov; Mark K. Nolan Subject: Fwd: Bruce Ave parking issue Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Edina Government Representatives; •Needless to say, the residents of Bruce Place and Bruce Ave felt extremely disappointed after Tuesday's meeting. We are not opposed to Edina Living Streets and we appreciate all the work that has gone into it. However, we only wanted to request consideration for one small part of the bigger plan that concerns us so directly. We would like to maintain two -sided parking without unsightly no - parking signs lined up and down our charming street. That option evidently was there in your original plans for this street. We appreciated being invited to the meeting and to discuss our request. However, it was so very clear and obvious that a decision had already been made. Mr. Mayor, you said repeatedly that this has been in the works for two years, but the decision about Bruce Ave became known to us much more recently, and unfortunately, many of us were out of town for the winter and unable to attend that meeting. But more important to me now are two questions begging to be asked: First, WHY are you insisting on making this change? Is it for safety? Because our street is already safe. I have lived on it for 43, years, with children and grandchildren, and never, ever has there been an accident. If anything, you will increase the danger and speed of cars turning right off of 50th Street during rush hour. Now, they will be provided a very convenient right hand lane with little opposing traffic, people who don't live on our block or in our neighborhood but who are cutting through to reach France and beyond. • Is it for appearance and charm? Again, it's not necessary as our street is picture postcard charming — and very desirable as far as realtors are concerned. One -sided parking gives a • street an efficient look, a street that is set up for the convenience of cars rather than residents. Arden Ave north of 50th is a good example of that. I realize that their street is already narrower and this is a must but it is not an attractive street and totally lacks charm. In fact, why does our street even need to be narrowed so that this has become an issue ?! Secondly, FOR WHOM are you making this change? Certainly not for those of us who live on it, many of us having lived here for 30- 45years. Is it to make it more convenient for those passing through and using our street as a short cut? To make it easier for street maintenance? To satisfy a grand Master Plan, without consideration for those who live on it? Where did this reasoning come from? One -sided parking will make it considerably less convenient for us and our guests. We share our street parking with St Stephen's Church, lawn service trucks, and of course, a never ending parade of construction vehicles. To limit parking options on our short street will cause no end of inconvenience to us and our guests. You all casually remark that we can look at these changes in another year, but we all know that something that is already in place is difficult to change once again. But why change it in the first place?! It is perfect the way it is! I would greatly appreciate your replies, giving me a simple WHY and FOR WHOM, and of • course, your reconsideration of this planned change. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Pat Lawrence, (formerly Pat Rice) 5015 Bruce Ave Pat Lawrence p atlawren ce 5 0 kgm ai 1. co m Happy Travels • D7s; • FOUNDATION FOR HOSPICE AND HOMECARE 228 SEVENTH STREET, SE • WASHINGTON, DC 20003 • (202) 547-7424 Dr. Ruth L. Constant Honorable Mark Begich Chairman President and CEO Honorable Robert J. Dole Val J. Halasnandaris, Chairman, Honorary Board of Trustees Founder Honorable James B. Hovland, Mayor Edina, MN 55424 -1330 Dear Mayor Hovland: The purpose of this note is to ask you to share a statement which captures your feelings and experience with hospice. We plan to publicize these comments, along with your photograph in our publications, on our website, and in a national ad campaign. I am writing to you in my new role as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Foundation for Hospice and Homecare and because I know the important role that Mayors play in shaping public policy. I had the honor of having been the Mayor of Anchorage Alaska prior to being elected to represent the people of Alaska in the United States Senate. I know that as a Mayor you are the closest public official to the people. You have to know their problems and spend all your waking hours trying to solve them. You have to be practical and pragmatic and put the public's need ahead of partisan considerations. It is difficult work As you know Mayors, for the most part, do the job not for the money or recognition but because it is a superb platform from which to serve others and do good. As I weighed my decision about what to do following my service in the US Senate, I looked for a position that would allow me to advance a vitally important cause — something that was urgently needed by the American public Hospice and homecare came to the top of my list As the Mayor of Anchorage, I helped to insure the first hospice in Alaska was successful by working with them to secure the best possible location to operate from. This was a highly gratifying experience. I learned that nurses, physicians and others who care for the sick and dying are among the most competant, caring and compassionate human beings. I continued to be a strong advocate of hospice and homecare during my Senate career. I encouraged the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to make greater use of these services, and to expand their telehealth services which connect patients in fragile health via an internet or phone connection with medical professionals 24/7. Allowing patients to literally be seen continuously was a huge advance in Alaska. In weighing my options, I was struck by one imperative. The. 78 million Baby Boom generation is now reaching the age of 65 at the rate of 10,000 a day. I learned that what this group wants more than anything is to lead a long and healthful life and remain independent in their own homes. To make this possible, they want and need homecare services and when the time comes, they want hospice, which means to die with dignity at home surrounded by their family and loved ones. This is the same need that is expressed as a top priority by the 51 million seniors and disabled persons who are currently enrolled in Medicare. Another relevant statistic for me is the fact that 10 percent of the U.S. public is responsible for 82 percent of all U.S. health care costs. These are persons who suffer from multiple • chronic diseases —in short, they need homecare and hospice to keep them at home and out (over, please) Representing the interests of hospice patients through quality standards, certification, research, and public awareness. of institutions. If we made better use of hospice and homecare, experts are convinced we could save billions in the cost of unnecessary hospitalizations. One would think that with a growing need which currently embraces roughly half of the U.S. population, that we would be expanding our homecare programs. The opposite is true. Medicare homecare services have, in fact been cut by some $76 billion since 2009 and Medicare hospice services are currently under attack. I decided to take on this important cause because of all of the above reasons. Moreover I have never met anyone whose family members have experienced hospice who were not pleased with the services. I also have enormous respect for the National Association for Home Care & Hospice (NAHC), our Foundation's, parent organization. NAHC is unmatched in its integrity, the quality of its leadership and its staff, some of whom played a key role in writing the Medicare and Medicaid home care and hospice benefits. The bottom line is that I believe that how we treat our infirmed and disabled citizens will be one of the defining issues for us in the 21st Century. I am determined to use my time and talents to inspire and rally the American public. I believe that we are at the tipping point. So many people have had positive experiences with hospice that all we need to do is encourage each person to speak out. Please join me by sending a brief statement and a high resolution photo in your mailed response, or send it to me by Email to mbegich@foundationbLhc.org. Thank you in advance for joining_this crusade that we call The Last Great Civil Rights Movement. It is importan t. Sincerely, A:W1#49r*/ Mark Begich, President and CEO, Foundation for Home Care & Hospice P.S. By way of inspiration, I am enclosing a list of quotations concerning hospice the we have received over the years. * Hospice relates to home delivered professional services including palliative care, pain control and personal care • given to those who are in the last few months of their lives. Homecare relates to in -home services ordered by phy- sicians given to homebound patients by nurses and health aides to ameliorate their complex and chronic medical problems which otherwise would require hospitalization. FOUNDATION FOR HOSPICE AND HOMECARE Hospice Quotes Hospice is part of a movement to humanize the way medical care is given. — Edward M. Kennedy (D -MA), fanner U.S. senator and sponsor of the Medicare hospice benefit Hospice care takes place in the best place of all: home — Hugh Downs, TVanchor and chairman of PBS's first TVseries on aging Hospice nursing was the essence of nursing. — Virginia Henderson, dean of Yale School of Nursing and author of the most widely accepted text on nursing They say that hospice is the best medical care no one wants because it signals the end of life and American culture is all about fighting until your last breath. But all of you know it generally means an end to futile curative care and getting the best quality care until the end. — Eleanor Clift, political reporter and TV pundit whose husband died in hospice I am a hospice drop out I received such good care I refused to die. Tender loving care is the reason that I'm still around. —Art Buchwald Pulitzer Prize- winning columnist and humorist My mother died and received the most wonderful care from hospice. I've been through it with my daughter. But the people in hospice are so caring that I wanted to take this opportunity from the bottom of my heart to say, `thank you.' — Tommy Thompson, former United States Secretary of Health and Human Services, and governor of Wisconsin I really believe that beyond the instincts of survival, sex, and power, there is a fourth instinct that makes us give of ourselves. You, as the movement of hospice and home care, know that because it takes that special instinct to do that job. Tapping into that and encouraging others to tap into that is the only way to change the country. — Arianna Huffzngton, ro founder and editor -in -chief of the Huff ngton Post The age wave is already straining access to hospice and palliative care for many Americans. Providing more training and incentives to study and practice palliative and hospice care would mean fewer patients suffering from the symptoms, stress, and pain of serious illness. — Ron Wyden, U.S. senator, and ranking democrat on the Senate Finance Committee We must ensure there is a trained workforce capable of meeting the demands of new models of health care delivery. Hospice and palliative care have become the standard of care for so many seriously ill persons and their families. These services can provide significant health cost savings while also improving outcomes. Supporting the education and training of providers in these areas of health care delivery will help enhance care for individuals and families coping with severe illness and life- threatening conditions. —Jack Reed U.S. senator (D-RV We want to make sure that nobody dies unloved and uncared for. We are hoping that they will be able • to live and die in peace by getting tender love and care. — Mother Teresa, founder of the Missionaries of Charity upon opening an AIDS hospice in New York We live in a particularly death - fearing society. We isolate both the dying and the old, and it serves a purpose. They are reminders of our own mortality. We should not isolate people. We can give families more help with home care and visiting nurses, giving families and the patient the spiritual, emotional, and financial help in order to facilitate the final care at home. — Elisabeth Kiibler -Ross, psychiatrist and author of the seminal book On Death and Dying As parents of a beloved child who died of leukemia, the president and I know beyond any doubt that hospice is a compassionate service of invaluable worth. — Former First Lady Barbara Bush I have long advocated for hospice care because its supportive environment can help terminally ill patients do better and actually live longer than they might otherwise. —John Breaux (D -LA), farmer U.S. senator and chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging You matter because you are you, and you matter to the end of your life. We will do all we can not only to help you die peacefully, but also to live until you die. — Dame Cicely Saunders, nurse, physician and writer, and faunder of St. Christopher's Hospice Issues affecting home care and hospice have been at the top of my priority list since I came to the Senate. Home health and hospice have consistently proven to be compassionate and cost - effective alternatives to institutional care. Additional deep cuts in spending for these programs are completely counterproductive to our efforts to control overall health care costs. — Susan Collins, U.S. senator and chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging I am for providing hospice care at home. For too long we have structured our reimbursement system so that people die in institutions with cold, ugly green walls and little comfort. • We can and should do better. — Bob Dole (R -KS), farmer Senate majority leader and sponsor of the Medicare hospice benefit In life you try your best to hold on tight to your dignity; in death sometimes others have to hold onto it for you. The premise of hospice care is very close to the bone for me. The hospice was available to look after my father before he died of cancer. These people are kind of angels. They escort you to the door of your death; they are the midwives for delivery into your next life. The comfort and relief they bring is exponential. It spills over to family, friends, colleagues. It's a blessing that everyone should be able to receive. — Bono, philanthropist; activist; and frontman of U2 The needs of families requiring children's palliative care across the world are varied. Circumstances and environment can differ, but the aim of those supporting them is the same: to offer the best and most loving rare possible. — Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cambridge Hospice provides a humanitarian way for a terminally ill patient to approach death with dignity, in relative comfort in a supportive atmosphere, and surrounded by family members. Its most important element is concern for patients and their families. Hospice advocates personal care and concern, living comfortably until death, the absence of pain, maintenance of personal control, and the close fellowship of the family unit. — Ronald Reagan, farmer President of the United States 1] • • • Heather Branigin From: Jennifer Janovy <jjanovy @outlook.com> Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 2:36 PM To: ann Swenson swenson; Mary Brindle (Comcast); Bob Stewart; Kevin Staunton Cc: Edina Mail; Scott H. Neal Subject: Open Meeting Law Advisory Opinion -- please include with council correspondence Attachments: 15002.pdf Dear Members of the Edina City Council: Please see the attached IPAD advisory opinion finding that the City Council did not comply with the MN Open Meeting Law as it relates to certain aspects of your handling of the city manager's performance evaluation earlier this year. Thank you, Jennifer Janovy Begin forwarded message: From: "Moxley- Goldsmith, Taya (ADM)" < taya. moxley- goldsmith(a�,state.mn.us> Date: May 8, 2015 8:10:25 AM CDT To: <jianovyA_outlook.com> Cc: "rknutson pck- law.com" <rknutson _ck- law.com >, "jhovland _EdinaMN.gov" <jhovland _EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Commissioner of Administration Advisory Opinion Ms. Janovy, Please find attached the Commissioner of Administration Advisory Opinion you requested regarding the Edina City Council. Feel free to contact me with any questions. Taya Moxley - Goldsmith Information Policy Analysis Division MINI Department of Administration 651- 201 -2502 Visit our website at www.ipad.state.mnus awl DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION Advisory Opinion 15 -002 This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2014). It is based on the facts and information available to the Commissioner as described below. Facts and Procedural History: On February 23, 2015, the Information Policy Analysis Division (IPAD) received an advisory opinion request from Jennifer Janovy, dated February 22, 2015. In her letter, Ms. Janovy asked the Commissioner to issue an advisory opinion regarding the Edina City Council (Council) members' conduct under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D, the Minnesota Open :Meeting Law (OML). IPAD asked Ms. Janovy to provide additional information and clarification, which she submitted on March 16, 2015. On March 20, 2015, IPAD wrote to Mayor James Hovland, Chair of the Council. In its letter, IPAD informed Mr. Hovland of Ms. Janovy's request and gave the members of the Council an opportunity to explain their position. On April 2, 2015, IPAD received a response, dated. same, from Roger Knutson, City Attorney. In her request for an advisory opinion, Ms. Janovy stated: "I am writing to request an Open Meeting Law advisory opinion related to how the Edina City Council handled the Edina City Manager's performance .review in January 2015." According to Ms. Janovy's opinion request, the Council held two closed meetings, one on January 6, 201.5, and one on January 20, 201.5, to evaluate the performance of the City Manager. Specifically, Ms. Janovy asked whether the notice for the January 20, 2015, meeting was sufficient, whether the Council properly conducted the meetings, and whether the summary of the performance evaluation was sufficient. Issues: Based on Ms. Janovy's opinion request, the CL MMiSSiOner agreed to address the following issues: 1. Did the Edina City Council comply with Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.04, subdivision 2(a), regarding notice for the January 20, 2015, special meeting? 2. Did the Edina City Council comply with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D when it closed meetings on January 6, 2015, and January 20, 2015, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 1313.05, subdivision 3(a), to evaluate the performance of an individual subject to its authority? • 15 -002 Did the Edina City Council comply with Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.05, subdivision 3(a), regarding its summary of the City Manager's performance evaluation at the February 3, 2015, meeting? Discussion: Issue .X. Did the Edina City Council comply with Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.04, subdivision 2(a), regarding notice_for the January 20, 2015, special meeting? Any meeting that is not on the regular schedule of meetings on file at a public body's primary offices must be noticed as a special meeting. For a special meeting, a public body must post written notice of the date, time, place and purpose of the meeting on the principal bulletin board or the door of the usual meeting room at least three days before the meeting. (See Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.04, subdivision 2.) At issue here, is whether the stated purpose of the meeting was sufficient. The Commissioner has previously opined that a special meeting notice must provide detail about the ptupose of the meeting. The public body's discussion is then confined to the purpose stated on the notice. (See Advisory Opinions 07 -014 and 10 -013.) These requirements inform the public and also allow public bodies to fulfill the requirement to provide special meeting notice to individuals who specifically request notice about particular topics. (See section 13D.04, • subdivision 2(d), and Advisory Opinion 04- 004.) • Here, the January 20, 2015, special meeting notice provided: THE CITY OF EDINA WITH THIS GIVES NOTICE that the Edina City Council will hold a closed work session for the purposes of completing the City Manager performance review, Tuesday, January 20, 2015, at 5:00 p.m. The work session will be held in the Community Room located on the second floor of Edina City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota. The work session will be closed. to the public. In her opinion request, Ms. Janovy wrote: A discussion about an employment agreement may be incidental to a perfonnance evaluation; however, the facts indicate that the primary purpose of the closed session was to review the City Manager's employment agreement. This conflicts with the meeting notice, which only provided notice of the performance evaluation. That the City Council intended to discuss the performance evaluation. is not disputed. Mr. Knutson, on behalf of the Council, wrote: The meeting notice stated that the purpose of the closed meeting was "completing the City Manager performance review." As an integral part of that performance review the City Council discussed the City Manager's compensation and prospective extension of his employment agreement. These issues are directly linked to his performance. 1) 15-002 The Commissioner agrees with Mr. Knutson that it is reasonable for an evaluation of an employee's performance to include a discussion of the employee's continued employment and compensation. Therefore, "for the purposes of completing the City Manager performance review" provides adequate notice to identify the purpose of the special meeting. Issue 2. Did the Edina City Council comply with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D when it closed meetings on January 6, 2015, and January 20, 2015, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.05, subdivision 3(a), to evaluate the performance of an individual subject to its authority? Section 13D.05, subdivision 3(a), provides, in part: A public body may close a meeting to evaluate the performance of an individual who is subject to its authority. The public body shall identify the individual to be evaluated prior to closing a meeting. Mr. Knutson wrote to the Commissioner: The Council did not complete its performance review discussion at the closed session meeting on January 6. The January 6 closed meeting was adjourned and a new closed session. was held on January 20 to enable the Council to complete Mr. Neal's performance evaluation... The statute does not limit the number of closed meetings that can be held to evaluate an employee. The Commissioner has previously opined that when a public body must hold multiple closed sessions to evaluate an employee tinder its authority, it should recess and resume the meeting, rather than adjourning and holding subsequent closed meetings. In Advisory Opinion 06 -020 the Commissioner concluded: If the Board identified the superintendent as the employee about to be evaluated in July 2005, and if the meeting was recessed and resumed, then it appears that the Board has complied. with section 13D.05, subdivision 3(a). If the Board did not identify the superintendent as the employee it was about to evaluate in July 2005, or if the meeting was not recessed and resumed, then the Board is not in compliance. [Emphasis added.] Here, the City Council convened and adjourned two separate closed meetings. Consistent with. Advisory Opinion 06 -020, the City should have recessed or continued the closed session to evaluate the performance of the City Manager. Ms. Janovy also provided the Commissioner with a copy of memo written by the City Manager following the January meetings. In it, he states that the Council met in closed session on January 6 to discuss his evaluation Mth the consultant hired. to perform the review. Following that meeting, the Council tasked the City Manager with drafting a proposed employment agreement. The City Manager wrote: • 3 15 -002 I met with Mayor Hovland and Council Member Swenson on January 9. I presented, them a proposed employment agreement. They subsequently reviewed that proposal, and then scheduled a closed session to review it with City Council Members on January 20, HR Director Lisa Schaefer also attended the closed session to assist the Council's discussion about the proposed agreement. [Emphasis provided.] Ms. Janovy noted that the consultant who performed the review did not attend the second meeting. While these facts alone do not establish that the January 20 closed meeting went beyond the scope of the performance evaluation, the following comments are in order. The Open Meeting Law does not contain a provision allowing public bodies to close meetings for general personnel reasons; meetings can only be closed in the specific circumstances described in section 13D.05 or by other statutes. As discussed in Issue 1, a performance evaluation may naturally include references to "compensation and prospective extension of [an] employment agreement." However, once a public body has deternined that the employee will remain employed with a possible change in pay based on his performance, and the discussion logically turns to the specifics about the employment agreement, the Council is no longer evaluating the performance of an individual per section 1313.05, subdivision 3(a). In these circumstances, contract negotiations must be done in an open meeting. Ms. Janovy also raised the issue of whether the Council properly closed the January meetings by making the required statements on the record. When a public body closes a meeting, it must state the specific grounds allowing or requiring the meeting to be closed and describe the subject to be discussed. (See Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.01, subdivision 4.) Mr.. Knutson wrote, "Before closing the meeting [sic] Mayor Hovland stated they were closing the meetings for purposes of evaluating the City Manager's performance" According to emails between Ms. Janovy and the Edina City Clerk, the Council recorded only the public portion of the January 6, 2015, meeting following the closed session. Neither Ms. Janovy nor Mr. Knutson. provided the statement closing the meeting. 'therefore, the Commissioner cannot determine whether the Council's statement was sufficient, with regard to the January 6, meeting. The Council recorded the open and closed portions of the January 20, 2015, meeting. However, because the Commissioner determined that closing the additional meeting for a performance evaluation was improper, the sufficiency of the January 20 statement is immaterial. Additionally, section 13D.05, requires that public bodies record all closed meetings, except those closed per attorney - client privilege. Because the Council did not do so on January 6, it did not comply with that provision of the Open Meeting Law. While Mr. Knutson did .not address this issue in his letter to the Commissioner, Mr. Hovland wrote, in a February 20, 2015, email to .Ms. Janovy, "Going forward, the City staff and the Council will take greater care to refrain from such errors. City staff is committed to being more careful about this responsibility in the future." The Commissioner is encouraged by Mr. Hovland's comments. 0 4 15 -002 Issue 3. Did the Edina City Council comply with .0innesota Statutes, section .13D.05, subdivision 3(a), regarding its summary of the City Manager's performance evaluation at the February 3, 2015, meeting? Pursuant to section 13D.05, subdivision 3(a), when a. public body closes a meeting for a performance evaluation, "at its next open meeting, the public body shall summarize its conclusions regarding the evaluation." Here, Ms. Janovy raised concerns regarding both the timing and the content of the summary provided by the Council. The Council held separate meetings on January 6 and January 20 and provided the summary at its open meeting on February 3, 2015. However, the "next open meeting" following the January 6, meeting, was the open portion of the January 20 meeting, right before the Council went into closed session. Therefore, the summary was not timely. Had the Council announced its intent to continue the January 6 meeting to January 20 (by recessing and reconvening, instead of adjourning), so that it could finish the performance evaluation, the public would have known to expect the summary at the February 3, meeting, i.e., its next open meeting. (See also, Advisory Opinion 12 -008.) Regarding the content of the summary, the Commissioner offered the following guidance in Advisory Opinion 02 -021: Government entities seeking guidance on what to summarize can look to the language of the Open Meeting Law. Specifically, Chapter 13D directs a governing body to "summarize its conclusions" regarding a personnel evaluation. How a public body approaches the evaluation will determine exactly which data it should summarize. The public body should carefully review the specific points it established in reaching a conclusion about the performance evaluation. Clearly, the language of the Open Meeting Law indicates that the governing body ought to summarize each salient point of the evaluation so that the public is given the opportunity to get the best possible sense of the performance - good, bad, or indifferent - of the public employee. The Commissioner addressed the sufficiency of several summaries in Advisory Opinion 14 -007. [In Advisory Opinions 99 -0.18, 02 -021, and 02 -035] the Commissioner concluded that the following statements were insufficient to fulfill the public bodies' statutory obligations: "[the Board] discussed the super'intendent's strengths and weaknesses "; "As a result of that review, strengths were noted and areas of improvement were defined. The board developed goals regarding communication and leadership "; and "areas of growth were identified and [the Superintendent's] evaluation is an. ongoing process" At the February 3 meeting, Mr. Hovland provided the following summary: "summarizing the conclusions of that evaluation, the council concluded that [the City Manager is] doing an excellent job and it's being reflected in this employment agreement that we are working on." While the statement provided by Mr. Hovland included a conclusion that the City Manager was "doing an excellent job," the City did not provide information consistent with guidance in prior advisory opinions that direct public bodies "to summarize each salient point of the evaluation so that the public is given the opportunity to get the best possible sense of the performance — good, bad, or indifferent — of the public employee." (See Advisory Opinion 02 -021.) C] 5 15 -002 Opinion: Based on the facts and information provided, the Commissioner's opinion. on the issues Ms. Janovy .raised is as follows: I. The Edina City Council complied with Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.04, subdivision 2(a), regarding notice for the January 20, 2015, special meeting. 2. The Edina City Council did not comply with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D when it closed meetings on January 6, 2015, and January 20, 2015; the Council held two meetings to evaluate the performance of the City Manager and it failed to record. the January 6, 2015, meeting. The Commissioner cannot determine if the Council made a proper statement on the record to close the January 6 meeting. 3. The Edina City Council did not comply with Minnesota Statutes, section. 13.D.05, subdivision 3(a), regarding the summary of the City Manager's performance evaluation because it should have provided a summary of the January 6 closed meeting during the open portion of January 20 meeting. As noted in previous opinions, a performance evaluation summary should include salient points of the evaluation so that the public is aware of the rationale upon which the public body based its conclusion. • Matthew Massman Commissioner May 7, 201.5 0 6 Heather Branigin_ From: Mitchell, David L. <DMitchell @RobinsKaplan.com> • Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 3:12 PM To: Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; Ann Swenson Cc: jemitche11922 @gmail.com' Subject: Parking Plan for Bruce Avenue and Bruce Place Attachments: 2015 -05 -08 Mitchell letter to City Counsel.pdf; Proposed Schematic Street PIan7.31,14.pdf Ladies and Gentlemen: Please see the attached letter. David L. Mitchell ROB1NS&KAPCaAiNi- SOO La"Wie Avenue i 2800 Plaza \-Dixtrieapolis, .1�1N 545402 Direct: 612,3=19.5282 E :Fax: 612.339, 1.81. j DMitchell @RobinsKaplan.com Information contained in this e -mail transmission may be privileged, confidential and covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510 -2521. 40 If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e -mail transmission in error, please notify us immediately of the error by return email and please delete the message from your system. Pursuant to requirements related to practice before the U. S. Internal Revenue Service, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the U. S. Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another person any tax - related matter. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Robins Kaplan LLP http://www.robinskgplan.com David L. Mitchell 5011 Bruce Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55424 Via Email May 8, 2015 Mayor James Hovland City Council Member Mary Brindle City Council Member Kevin Staunton City Council Member Bob Stewart City Council Member Ann Swenson Re: Bruce Avenue and Bruce Place Parking Dear Council Members and Mayor Hovland: • I am writing to follow up on the comments expressed by a number of my neighbors (and my spouse) at this past Wednesday night's Council meeting in favor of continuing to permit parking on both sides of Bruce Avenue south of 50th Street, after completion of the street and sewer reconstruction project currently underway. First of all, I would like to make clear that the fact that we made our comments and presented our signed petition at the same meeting at which the City's Living Streets Plan was scheduled for public hearing was purely coincidental. The expression of our collective and narrow concern regarding parking should in no way be interpreted as opposition to the City's Living Streets PIan. In earlier discussions with City staff concerning this issue, we were encouraged to circulate a petition on the matter and present it to the City Council. At Wednesday night's meeting, we were troubled by sentiments expressed to the effect that the opportunities for resident input on elements of the Arden Park D Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project had been made available, that the one -side only parking issues had been thoroughly vetted by City staff and interested residents, that the Council had spoken on this issue and that it was a "done deal." • 85856553.1 May 8, 2015 Via Email Page 2 - • Revorts; Presentations. In reviewing the history of this project, however, it appears that there was not nearly the amount of clarity of information on the street and parking issues for Bruce Avenue as was suggested at the meeting. Information in the Engineering Study dated November 12, 2014 prepared by the City's Engineering Department (the "Study "), and the Appendices attached to the Study is illustrative. On pages 4 and 5 of the Study, staff notes the open houses for residents held on October 8, 2012 and September 9, 2013, and the written presentations from those meetings included in Appendix A to the Study. These presentations did not address the width of Bruce Avenue or the expected parking configuration. Another neighborhood informational meeting was held on July 31, 2014 and a copy of the presentation and related public input are contained in Exhibit C to the Study. Again, the presentation did not address the width or parking plan for Bruce Avenue. However, question 19 in the summary of the question and answer session to the July 31 meeting asked "What is the proposed street plan where no sidewalks are proposed ?" The City's answer: "The cross - sections include a 2 -way 17' driving lane and a 7' wide parking lane on one side." (Emphasis added) Similarly, the "Proposed Schematic Street Plan: Indianola to Bruce Ave. Ju1.31" on the City's web page for this project, clearly depicts Bruce Avenue as 24 -feet wide. A copy of this Schematic Street Plan accompanies this letter. As late as October 23, 2014, Mr, Toby Muse of SEH, Inc. reported to the City's Transportation Commission that "[s]treets without sidewalks will be 26 ft. wide except for Minnehaha Avenue which will be 27 ft. wide...." (See Transportation Commission meeting minutes, Appendix O to the Study) Residents /Third Party Input. In its Study, the Engineering Department noted (and provided copies of) the comments of area residents to the reconstruction project. Comments from Bruce Avenue /Bruce Place residents uniformly opposed parking on only one side of • 85856553.1 0 May 8, 2015 Page 3 Via Email reconstructed Bruce Avenue. There were no comments in favor.' There is, in fact, no indication in the Study or in any other City presentation concerning this project that 2- sided parking along Bruce Avenue has ever been a problem that needed a solution. The Study also states that the Police Department noted that it does not have a history of parking problems along Bruce Avenue stemming from services at St. Stephens church. Living Streets Policy and Plan. The previously- adopted Living Streets Policy and the recently - adopted Living Streets Plan both provide that in the case of Local Streets of 27 foot width, the parking options are "None, one or both sides of the street, depending on context." The Living Streets Policy (on page 3) addresses "context sensitivity" and provides, in pertinent part, that "[a]lthough many streets look more or less the same, every street is a unique combination of its neighborhood, adjacent land uses, natural features, street design, users, and modes. To accommodate these differences, the City Is will • Seek input from stakeholders; • Design streets with a strong sense of place; • Be mindful of existing land uses and neighborhood character..." We and our neighbors consider Bruce Avenue/ Bruce Place a unique and special place. As a nine year old in the mid '50s, I traversed the street weekly on my way to piano lessons at Ms. Ylvisaker's home on Indianola. As a (likely) self - absorbed high school student in the mid'60s, I could not help but notice the beautiful canopied street as I drove past on 50th Street, not then knowing that a couple of decades later, I would own a home on this delightful stretch of Bruce Avenue. In the absence of any articulated or perceived parking problem or need and in the face of strong and universal opposition by the affected Bruce Avenue residents to the one -side parking change, the City Council's decision to make this change seems like the application of a "one size fits all" solution to a non - existent problem without taking into account the "context" of our neighborhood. On behalf of our neighbors, I ' We were able to reach 27 out of a possible 30 households to sign the petition delivered to the Council on Wednesday. All 27 are in favor of maintaining the status quo with parking on both sides of the street. 40 85856553.1 May 3, 2015 Via E-mail Page 4 0 respectfully request that the City Council reconsider its prior action and permit parking on both sides of the street. A suggestion: Don't do anything for a year after the street reconstruction is complete and then see if there is a problem. Sincerely, David L. Nlitchell 85856353.1 • LI • ARDEN PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS KORMATKML MEE a SEN F- PROPOSED SCHBAATIC STREET PLAN C-) tit .i_- PROPOSED SfRfff SECTION C-C PROPOSED STREET SECTION D-D Cw.- w5mv) (—A AVE) MUUNOIA AM Heather Branigin From: Sue Welna (welavender @aol.com) <welavender @aol.com> 40 Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 5:47 PM To: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: thank you Mayor and Council Members, Thank you so much for voting for Edina to financially support the Beacon Housing project at 66 West. It is an excellent way for Edina to demonstrate its commitment to caring for homeless youth in our community. I appreciate your support. Sue Welna 5139 West 44th St Edina, MN 55436 Heather Branigin From: Karen <kbikegirl @aol.com> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 8:04 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Sound Wall over Minehaha Creek I am a resident at 5048 Edinbrook Lane, and am IN FAVOR of the much needed sound wall project moving forward. The vote is on Tuesday May 19, 2015. 1 will be watching your votes in favor of this sound wall along Hwy. 100. Karen Bryan • • Heather Branigin From: Mary <maltuvilla @earthlink.net> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 9:44 AM To: Edina Mail Cc: Mary Altuvilla Subject: Attention city council and engineering Subject: TH100 noise wall improvement No. SA -17 Minneapolis Creek to Vernon Ave Good morning,• As homeowners in the impacted area we are strongly in favor of the proposed sound wall improvement. We have been residents for over 36 years and feel the quality of life and safety aspect of the wall is long over due. Please vote YES on Tuesday, May 19. The proposal before the Council is the most reasonable option ever presented to the neighborhood. I can't imagine a better offer in the future. Your vote assures strong neighborhood home values and safety for the residents. If you have concerns or want to talk to a homeowner please contact us. We would be happy to share our observations with you. We would also welcome you to visit Edinbrook Lane at Highway 100 to hear and see first hand the noise and close range freeway traffic we experience on a daily basis. Please pass this request for sound wall improvement. Mary and Bill Hartupee 5016 Edinbrook Lane Please confirm this email was received and read. Sent from my iPad Heather Branigin IsFrom: Ian Abel <ianhabel @aol.com> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 3:04 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: theabels2 @aol,com; Ian Abel Subject: Re: Proposed Improvement No. SA -17 TH100 Noise Wall Improvements Proposed Improvement No. SA -17 TH100 Noise Wall Improvements Attention: City Council and Engineering, We will be out -of -town on the evening of the meeting; otherwise we would have been attending, as we attended the previous meeting on the subject. As residents of Millpond Place for more than 20 years now, we are excited that this project is finally going to be undertaken. We feel it will greatly improve the neighborhood by reducing the Hwy. 100 noise level as well as providing a visual barrier to the traffic, and for those whose property backs onto the highway, additional privacy. We have been in favor of this project since it was first discussed several years ago, and expect it will provide an additional positive effect on property values as a result. Please include our names as IN FAVOR, in any poll /vote on the proposal. • Yours respectfully, Ian & Julie Abel 5104 Millpond Place, Edina, MN 55436 • 1 Heather Branigin From: Betsy Cussler <betsycussler @comcast.net> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 4:17 PM To: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart, swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: 66 WEST Jim, Mary, Kevin, Bob and Ann, THANK YOU! What a great step forward for Edina! 1 am very grateful for the City Council's support of 66 WEST and look forward to working with you going forward. I am so proud of Edina! Betsy Cussler •I I Heather Branigin • From: Sandy Simmons <ssimmons47 @gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 6:43 PM To: Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @ gmail.com Cc: jemitche11922 @gmail.com; caryschilling @gmail.com; jdarice @msn.com; carol cushmore; ascl881 @aol.com; angiellarson@comcast.net;jeff.hovanec@cambriaUSA.com Subject: Bruce Avenue Parking Jim Hovland, Kevin Staunton, Bob Stewart, Ann Swenson, and Mary Brindle, We live at 5038 Bruce Place and are extremely disappointed the city council is refusing to listen to the concerns of our entire block of residents regarding the decision to allow parking on only one side of our street. There has been no logical reason given to support this decision other than it has already been decided so you can't change it. Yes you can. If it isn't broken, why are you trying to 'fix' it? With all the residents on the street opposed to what you are going to do, why isn't the council listening? What is your reasoning? On an issue directly impacting only our street, shouldn't the council be representing our concerns? Who are you representing with this decision? We don't want unnecessary signs in our yards and we NEED the parking spaces. We will be severely inconvenienced to not have any parking in front of our house and along our side of the street. Residents in the cul -de -sac will have NO on street parking available to them. That makes no sense. If the concern is slowing the traffic through the street, parking on both sides is a traffic calming measure. There is extreme frustration when the 'powers that be' make an arbitrary unnecessary decision effecting our daily lives in the face of 100% opposition. • We urge you to restore our faith in the Edina city government by listening and making the choice to eliminate these unnecessary and unwanted no parking signs and the inconvenience they will bring to all of us. It is very difficult to understand why you are deciding against every single resident of the area effected. There is NO opposition to parking on both sides of the street except by the city council and you have given no valid reason for not supporting us. It is clearly not too late to make the decision to maintain the existing parking on both sides of Bruce Avenue and Bruce Place and SIMPLY DECIDE TO NOT PUT UP THE SIGNS. If, at anytime in the future, there are concerns or complaints the signs can be added. Common sense is to not put up the signs unless they are deemed necessary in the future. Please use common sense and support the residents that your decision is directly effecting. Cal and Sandy Simmons 0 Heather Branigin From: robert mallon <nOfhv @yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 8:00 PM To: James Hovland Subject: becon I appalled that you would give these beacon clowns a half of million dollars of my hard earn tax money to bring into my neighborhood their felons, pedophiles, and drug addicts. I realize that liberals like yourself are mentally deprive and have no real world experience so you think they are homeless because they haven't had a break in life and your going to save them by destroying this neighborhood. Why don't you resign so we can get a mayor who cares about us. Bob Mallon 6328 barrie rd apt 1d Edina, Mn 55435 (612) 280 5847 • • Heather Branigin • From: The Kaminsens <kaminsen @yahoo,com> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 9:43 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Thank you for supporting 66 West! Heather Branigin From: David Frenkel <frenkel @att.net> al Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 9:42 PM To: Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com Cc: Scott H. Neal Subject: Car Stolen in Country Club posted on Nextdoor.com and subsequent lack of police response on early Sunday morning (May 10) Car Stolen in Country Club - White Range Roverl7h ago Scott Busyn from Country Club Our vehicle was stolen out of our garage while we were in the house tonight. I noticed it gone when I went to bed about 12:30. 1 called 911 twice but Edina police did not respond right away and said they needed to send St. Louis Park police (hugh ? ? ?) At that point I figured I was on my own so I went out on my bike to see if I could find our car and saw an African American male walk out between two houses on Wooddale Avenue. About 59 black sweatshirt, black sweat pants, had some kind of yellow or gold logo on left breast. I confronted him and he was extremely jumpy. I called the Edina police again as I felt I had the guy cornered but they again didn't respond. I asked the man again what he was doing and he reached in his back pocket for something. At that point I backed off as I feared he may have a weapon. I let him go but followed him on my bike down Wooddale, then down Bridge Lane, then Edina Blvd. All the while I was frantically calling the police trying to get them to come and check the guy out. I lost track of him on Edina Blvd but then heard him jump in a car and it squealed off. Called Edina police 5 more times (for a total of 9 times). They finally showed up over an hour after I first called. Very frustrating, especially since Edina police • station is 1/4 mile away. I always felt Edina police responded quickly but I guess I learned we can't always count on them to protect us. 911 dispatcher and St. Louis Park police were also incredibly unhelpful. It took over 1.5 hours to get an alert out that there was a stolen car and that was after me asking over and over again if they could please send out an alert. Please let me know if anyone sees a 2014 White Range Rover, I really appreciate any information anyone can provide. It also has my daughter's dance costumes for tomorrows dance competition (UGH!!!). Thank you neighbors!!!! . Shared with Country Club + 18 neighborhoods in Crime & Safety David Frenkel 612- 237 -1966 • Heather Branigin • From: Daniel A. Tysver <dtysver @bitlaw.com> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 9:54 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Support for 66 West Mayor Hovland, I very much appreciate the support that you have given to 66 West, and in particular I wanted to thank you for your work in obtaining funding for 66 West through the city of Edina. 66 West is great example of the local community, churches, and the city working together to help meet a pressing need in our community. Because of your leadership, and the fabulous community of Edina, we are that much closer to providing a home for 39 homeless youth in the western suburbs. Thanks! - Dan Daniel A. Tysver Beck Tysver Evans 2900 Thomas Ave. South, #100 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Ph: 612 -915 -9634 Fax: 612- 915 -9637 • • Heather Branigin From: Dee Dee Edlund <dsedlund @comcast.net> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 12:31 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Thank you for supporting 66th West Mayor Hovland, Thank you for your support of capital funding investment for 66 West and the homeless youth who need this housing. 66th West will make our community a better place for all. Thanks again for your leadership. DeeDee Edlund Heather Branigin Hello- I am following up regarding 4419 Grimes, the tearing down of over 40 legacy trees and the lack of plan to plant new trees to provide privacy to existing neighbors while replenishing the urban canopy that has taken over a century to develop. As we all know, the complete razing of this property was done within a month of the tree ordinance being passed. The fact that this project was live when the ordinance was passed would lead me to believe that there should be a retroactive application of the ordinence to builder and owners. The builder and new owners need to be held accountable for this blatant disregard for the existing neighborhood. Please let me know what can be done to ensure that ample trees and landscaping will be applied to this lot to adhere to the ordinance. Best- 10 Phil and Monica Mero 4501 Grimes Avenue On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Mary Brindle <mbrindlegeomcast.net> wrote: Hello Cindy and Cary, What is happening at 4419 Grimes? Can we prevent removal of legacy trees such as those described the sender in this message? Mary Brindle. From: Edina Mail Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 12:09 PM Subject: FW: 4419 Grimes Avenue Lynette Biunno, Receptionist + 952- 927 -8861 J Fax 952 - 826 -0389 €? -5 73 " Y IbiunnoCdEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, L earning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Phil Mero <phil.mero @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 1:25 PM To: Mary Brindle (Comcast) Cc: Cindy Larson; Cary Teague; Scott H. Neal; Monica Mero; Michael Platteter; Laura Plaetzer, James Hovland Subject: Re: Fw: 4419 Grimes Avenue Hello- I am following up regarding 4419 Grimes, the tearing down of over 40 legacy trees and the lack of plan to plant new trees to provide privacy to existing neighbors while replenishing the urban canopy that has taken over a century to develop. As we all know, the complete razing of this property was done within a month of the tree ordinance being passed. The fact that this project was live when the ordinance was passed would lead me to believe that there should be a retroactive application of the ordinence to builder and owners. The builder and new owners need to be held accountable for this blatant disregard for the existing neighborhood. Please let me know what can be done to ensure that ample trees and landscaping will be applied to this lot to adhere to the ordinance. Best- 10 Phil and Monica Mero 4501 Grimes Avenue On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Mary Brindle <mbrindlegeomcast.net> wrote: Hello Cindy and Cary, What is happening at 4419 Grimes? Can we prevent removal of legacy trees such as those described the sender in this message? Mary Brindle. From: Edina Mail Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 12:09 PM Subject: FW: 4419 Grimes Avenue Lynette Biunno, Receptionist + 952- 927 -8861 J Fax 952 - 826 -0389 €? -5 73 " Y IbiunnoCdEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, L earning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Phil Mero [mailto:phil.mero @gmail.com] Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 11:55 PM To: jonibennett120comcast.net Cc: Edina Mail;'Monica Mero Subject: 4419 Grimes Avenue Hello Joni- Phil Mero here, I live at 4501 Grimes Avenue. REFINED recently purchased the house (lot) 1 house to the north. They took the house down today, and are preparing to raze essentially the entire yard. Trust me, the house had to go, BUT the yard does should not be completely cleared. I am reaching out because in 2010 our want for a variance was almost denied due to the former owner and her concern for 1 of the pine trees. The council at the time was very concerned about preserving our URBAN Canopy, so much so that it came down to a 3 -2 vote thankfully in our favor. Since that time, we have come very attached to the amazing trees that are on that lot. This is one of the most mature lots in the area, home to 3 80+ year old, and 50+ foot tall pine trees. One white pine in particular is one of the most amazing trees you will ever see. (photo attached) This tree belongs along the shores of Lake Vermillion, and now it is going to find it's fate at the hands of a builder so that the new home owners can put in a pool. The fact that a historic neighborhood like Momingside can fall victim to a plethora of 'carpetbagger' builders (I know Porter is from Edina, West Edina) and quickly become'Edina Praire' is a travesty. The house next to 4419 is the 'Turret House', built just prior to our addition in 2010. The family who built the house lived in it for less than 2 years. Since moving in 2011, the house has been a habitual rental, having been on and off the market for over 2 years. This house WILL NOT SELL. Overnight, almost 100 years.of rich, mature community is being blitzkrieged at such an enormous cost to the rich landscape. Unfortunately it is happening on your watch. Not a legacy I would want to uphold. As longtime Edina residents, how can YOU help US preserve what makes this part of Edina s000 special. I do appreciate your quick response to this sincere plea for assistance. Phil and Monica Mero 4501 Grimes Avenue 8 year residents (Monica grew up in Country Club) Phil Mero 612.963.0852 40 City of Edina May 10, 2015 4801 W 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Reference to hole in fence around holding pond Mayor James Hovland In late October, 2014, 1 had a accident with my car. I was pulling out of my garage which faces the alley and holding pond. I live at 6400 Xerxes Ave. So. My brakes were bad and I lost control of my car, went through the chain link fence surrounding the pond and struck a tree in the holding pond area. No one was hurt, the car was totaled. I called my insurance company plus the Edina Police to make a report of the accident. The problem is this: Edina is not taking claim to the fence nor the holding pond. The pond is on the SW corner of 64th & York Ave. Edina maintenance people mow the lawn around the pond as well as run the equipment to lower the water level in the pond I have made at least 4 phone calls to various offices at city hall; my husband has gone to city Hall twice. We are always told that someone will be right on it, but nothing happens. This happened 5 months ago, and we are still waiting. This may not be all that important to you in the big city thinking, but what if someone get hurt and sues the city. Then what? I went so far as to call Mid -West Fencing to fix the fence, They will not touch it as we don't own the property that the fence is on and Edina won't admit to owning it. The 2nd part of the problem lies in the fact that there is a gaping hole in the fence. Young children get on & off the school bus at the alley and walk pass this gaping hole. It has quite a draw, when playing ball in the alley; they could lose their balance, fall down the hill into the pond, get hurt or even drown. • We have put up a vinyl type fence to keep the dogs, cats and kids out of this dangerous area. Please help us solve this problem. My insurance Company is waiting to settle this issue. The insurance will (ay for the replacement of the fence. Insurance Co. Farmers Ins. 1- 800 - 327 -6869 Agent Duey Hoefer 763 - 488 -1700 Insurance Claim # 3001894300 Edina Police Case # 2014096872 Officer Tom Olson Badge #164 Waiting to hear from you. Kathryn Elliott 952 - 920 -1905 6400 Xerxes Ave. So. Edina, MN 55423 • • • Heather Branigin From: Sent: To: Subject: Hello Mayor Hovland- Paul Brown <paulbrown @eworksinc.com> Monday, May 11, 2015 2:13 PM James Hovland Bruce Avenue resident I live at 5001 Bruce Avenue and wanted to express my concern about the proposed single side parking change on Bruce. Bruce Avenue south of 50th is a very quiet street, but we already get a lot of cars parking on it from St. Stephen's Episcopal Church at 50th and Wooddale (primarily on Wednesday's and Sunday's). I know the goal in doing this is slowing traffic down on streets, but again, this is a very quiet street with minimal traffic. I've been to almost all of the city meetings regarding the street project, but only heard about the recent one after it happened. Thanks in advance for your time. Sincerely, Paul Brown 5001 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 952.922.9995 ..... ..... . . ........ . ... . ..... . ......... . ................. ......... . . ..... . ... ..... ................... . ............ . .................... ................................................. Paul Brown Vice PresidentlOperations Director en +eitainnie works nc WV P S : eworksinc.com KNOW YOUR A1J691A14:ar. 612.919. 5166 office 1 Heather Branigin From: Ted Cushmore <tcushmore135 @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 3:42 PM To: James Hovland Cc: Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com; jemitche11922 @gmail.com; caryschilling @gmail.com; carol cushmore; patlawrence50 @gmail.com; jdarice @msn.com; asc1881 @aol.com; Kevin Staunton; sandysimmons @comcast.net Subject: Bruce Ave parking plan Dear Jim: Carol and I want to add our voice to the thoughtful emails our neighbors on Bruce Ave and Bruce Place have sent you and other members of the City Council regarding the plan to restrict parking to one side of the street as part of the Edina Living Streets Plan. We all appreciate all the work that has gone into the overall plan and we support it, except for the parking proposal for Bruce Ave and Bruce Place. Several of the responses back by council members have a dismissive tone to them, saying in effect that Bruce Ave residents had their chance to comment on the parking plan and failed to do so in a timely manner, so it is too late to change it. At best this opportunity for input was ambiguous as the parking aspect of it wasn't clear to all of us. Now that the residents clearly understand what the parking plan looks like, we are all against it. Our voices should be heard and the plan should be changed. The plan should be changed for two main reasons: First, we see a bigger safety issue associated with one side parking than with two side parking because two side parking promotes slower, more careful driving. Second, the no parking signs will change the character and look of the street and make a charming street much less charming. If we were requesting something that required construction, engineering, or timetable changes we could understand the reluctance to do so. But all we are requesting is to allow two side parking and not to put up no parking signs on one side of the street. This is an easy, painless change to make and is what all of us on Bruce Ave and Bruce Place want. Let's make the change. Ted and Carol Cushmore Heather Braniain • From: Jessica Cook <cooksfour @comcast.net> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 8:42 PM To: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: Thank you for Supporting Beacon interfaith Housing! Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, Thank you for voting to provide funding to Beacon Interfaith Housing's youth supportive housing development in Edina. I think it will be a tremendous asset to our community, and invaluable in the lives of the youth who will get to live there. I have toured Beacon's Nicollet Square development and am confident they will provide a great facility here in Edina. Thank you for your previous planning approvals and your recent financial support of this project. Jessica Cook 5408 Glengarry Parkway Edina, MN 55436 • Heather Branigin Hello- As you know, we have major concerns with the driveway next door. We believe that there are serious issues that present a danger to our family and our property. In the photos you will notice how tight the driveway is going to have to be to our property. This driveway is encroaching on our property line with a very tight approach to the garage. They have also built up the driveway an additional 12 -18 inches. The fear of a car slipping on ice, or accidental revving of gas pedal could lead to a car ending up in our backyard, or worse our home. With this comes the fear of injuring or even killing a child, pet, neighbor. Everyone that has seen this, driveway situation is amazed that it was cleared to be built. We need to be assured that our home and family are safe. The assurance that there will be a proper retaining wall or solid structure in place would help to help mitigate these fears. We need to be at the table with the city and builder to work toward a solution that will work for all parties. The primary issues we have are in association with: • safety • water drainage • erosion of hill • snow removal Please let us know what next steps are concerning this driveway. Sincerely- Phil Mero 612.963.0852 • • • From: Phil Mero <phil.mero @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:44 PM To: Cindy Larson; Charlie Gerk; Monica Mero Cc: Mary Brindle (Comcast); James Hovland Subject: Major driveway concerns at 4419 Grimes Attachments: driveway jpg; driveway hill jpg Hello- As you know, we have major concerns with the driveway next door. We believe that there are serious issues that present a danger to our family and our property. In the photos you will notice how tight the driveway is going to have to be to our property. This driveway is encroaching on our property line with a very tight approach to the garage. They have also built up the driveway an additional 12 -18 inches. The fear of a car slipping on ice, or accidental revving of gas pedal could lead to a car ending up in our backyard, or worse our home. With this comes the fear of injuring or even killing a child, pet, neighbor. Everyone that has seen this, driveway situation is amazed that it was cleared to be built. We need to be assured that our home and family are safe. The assurance that there will be a proper retaining wall or solid structure in place would help to help mitigate these fears. We need to be at the table with the city and builder to work toward a solution that will work for all parties. The primary issues we have are in association with: • safety • water drainage • erosion of hill • snow removal Please let us know what next steps are concerning this driveway. Sincerely- Phil Mero 612.963.0852 • • v i \ 1: Fit: / 1%, ^�, \ \ \ §\ : . / 1%, ^�, \ \ \ §\ Heather Branigin • From: Phil Mero <phil.mero @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 10:59 PM To: Cindy Larson; Charlie Gerk; Monica Mero; Scott H. Neal Cc: Mary Brindle (Comcast); James Hovland Subject: Re: Major driveway concerns at 4419 Grimes Highly concerned residents reach out with a warranted grievance and we can not get a response within 24 hours. We need correspondence regarding our concerns tomorrow. We know how builders work, and how they steamroll over the existing residents. We need to have visibility to the driveway plans ASAP. We have asked on several occasions (both city and Refined) to see the plans with claims of not being finished or submitted yet. The new owners are scheduled to move in June 24th, the plans are finished. We have been in this neighborhood and home for 9 years ... paying taxes, investing $250K+ in an addition that added value to Edina's bottom line while being truly engaged neighbors. I am one of the founders of the Morningside Athletic Club, I coach Edina youth soccer/hockey, my wife is in the Morningside Woman's Club, she is an avid volunteer at Concord Elementary, hell she WENT to Concord Elementary. We are here for the long haul and deserve to feel like our city has our back. We need to walk the property with a city official to talk through this issue by end of the week with or without plans. • Phil and Monica Mero On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:44 PM, Phil Mero <phil.mero(?grnail.com> wrote: Hello- As you know, we have major concerns with the driveway next door. We believe that there are serious issues that present a danger to our family and our property. In the photos you will notice how tight the driveway is going to have to be to our property. This driveway is encroaching on our property line with a very tight approach to the garage. They have also built up the driveway an additional 12 -18 inches. The fear of a car slipping on ice, or accidental revving of gas pedal could lead to a car ending up in our backyard, or worse our home, With this comes the fear of injuring or even killing a child, pet, neighbor. Everyone that has seen this driveway situation is amazed that it was cleared to be built. We need to be assured that our home and family are safe. The assurance that there will be a proper retaining wall or solid structure in place would help to help mitigate these fears. We need to be at the table with the city and builder to work toward a solution that will work for all parties. • The primary issues we have are in association with: • safety ' • water drainage • • erosion of hill • snow removal Please let us know what next steps are concerning this driveway. Sincerely- Phil Mero 612.963.0852 Sincerely- Phil Mero 612.963.0852 • Heather Branigin • From: Rebecca Brown <rbihr @yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 11:13 AM To: James Hovland Cc: Rebecca Brown Subject: Fwd: Bruce Avenue Parking Situation >> Good morning Mayor Hovland: >> I live at 5001 Bruce Avenue and have been a resident for nearly 5 years. I am disappointed to hear of the decision to impose 1 -sided parking and invest in "parking on one side only" signs when I believe, based on my conversations with quite a few households over these past months /weeks, that a strong majority of us on the street do not feel there is a present issue to be "fixed." Unfortunately, I travel extensively for work and was not aware of the petition going around as I most certainly would have signed it stating my opposition to this particular portion of the plan. >> Further, I have lived here long enough to know there is a real need for two -sided street parking at a minimum of several times a week due to services and activities at St. Stephens Episcopal church which does not have its own dedicated parking lot —our section of Bruce becomes a frequent choice for parking for church goers, leaving little room for resident /resident guest cars. I have been told by others on Bruce. that the response thus far has been "try it [one - sided parking] for year and then maybe it can be revisited." This seems to me like a backwards approach, i.e. to expend resources on unsightly "no parking signs" now with the possibility they would be removed later. Surely, there are better • things these resources could be allocated toward. A simpler, common sense solution would be to continue to allow 2- sided parking for at least another year and then revisit whether there is a need for limitations in the future. I am hoping we can count on your support to request the City Council revisit the parking and related sign issues. >> Bruce is a very quiet, unique street without much traffic. I would hate to see unnecessary changes imposed, particularly when the vast majority of residents on our short street have voiced they do not want to see this change made. >> Thank you, >> Becky Brown >> 5001 Bruce >> rbihr(@vahoo.com • Heather Branigin From: Coleton Whitaker < coleton@ americansforresponsiblesolutions .org> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 2:16 PM To: Lynette Biunno Subject: Follow up re domestic violence work Hi Lynette, I just wanted to follow up from a previous request to Mayor Hovland. My name is Coleton Whitaker and I work at Americans for Responsible Solutions, the gun violence prevention organization founded by former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. One of the priority areas we are working on at the federal level is legislation that addresses the connection between domestic abuse and firearms and we are currently working to reach out to Congressman Erik Paulsen on a specific bill. I wanted to see if the mayor, yourself, or the appropriate individual of your office might be free for a phone call in the near future to learn more about our group and the legislation. While we are working very closely with domestic violence groups at the national level, we are also hoping to engage local in- district individuals in this effort. Thank you so much for your consideration. Best wishes, Coleton Coleton Whitaker Advbcacy Associate Americans for Responsible Solutions (903)241-2181 coleton((Dresponsibl esolutions.org • • • James Hovland III%, 'L4 801 W 50th St _ Edina MN 55424 -1330 r May 2015 Dear James, Each day, I am reminded of the impact of our work when I hear from past students who reach out to share their \ personal stories of success with me. A few months ago, I had the pleasure of reconnecting with my former student, David Rollen. He shared this with me: it Growing up with a challenging home life on the North side of Minneapolis, it was easy to allow the difficulties in my life to get the best of me. In 7th grade at Anwatin Middle School, I was getting into trouble and was separated from the regular student population. I was struggling in school. I was trying to figure out who I was, trying to find my identity. Then I got the lead in the Project SUCCESS musical and everything began to change. Adrienne and all the people at Project SUCCESS took me out of my comfort zone, and I discovered talents I never knew I had. They supported me no matter what. They believed in me. They provided me with care and compassion and allowed me to gain the confidence to believe in myself. My grades got better. I was on the honor roll. Most importantly, I began to find hope in my future and my true identity. • If I hadn't gotten involved in Project SUCCESS, I would not have made the right decisions I made later in life. I graduated from college and am now working with troubled youth in a treatment center in Arizona. My dream is to complete my Master's degree in professional counseling and start my own therapeutic group home. Project SUCCESS has proved to be HUGE for me in my life and it radiates throughout the entire community. PJ With your support, we can make this possible for even more students in our own community, and beyond. As we near the end of our fiscal year, please consider making a gift to Project SUCCESS today so that we ti may inspire, motivate and prepare more students like David to Dream, Plan and Succeed. Thank you! Gratefully, Adrienne Diercks, Founder and Executive Director projectsuccess.org DNG 583 EKDAK rrc 90% of students report that Project SUCCESS helps them to create goals and a plan for after graduation.* * Evaluation by the University of Minnesota Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement A... .. .•r A -dAtk V 4 �AV��. i�► f African American and Latino students who participate in both Project SUCCESS musicals and college visits have up to a 26% increase in grade point average over four years. ** A w 4w ® !® * *Analysis of participation data by Eric Moore, Director of Research, Evaluation and Assessment for Minneapolis Public Schools. We motivate and inspire young people ""7to dream about the future, help them take steps to get there and give them the tools they need to achieve their goals. Founder and Executive Director Julie DuBois Charles Montreuil Adrienne Diercks Chief Financial Officer Vice President, Enterprise Rewards Fredrikson & Byron P.A. - & Corporate Human Resources Board of Directors Best Buy Darryle Owens, Chair Karla Ekdahl Community Leader Community Leader Shana Moses Coordinator, Elementary & Ann Ruschy, Vice Chair Moira Grosbard Secondary Education Act, Chief Connection Officer Principal Minneapolis Public Schools Salo Network Careers Inc. JoAnn Neau Kelvin W. Miller, Treasurer Elise Linehan Head, Marketing & Content Strategy Corporate Vice President Product Marketing Abbot Downing of Communications and Retail Consultant Lifetouch Inc. John Pershing Todd Macgregor Executive Vice President — Cheryl Creecy, Secretary Community Leader Human Resources Education Relations Consultant Ascena Retail Group, Inc. Jody Rodrigues Claim Resolution Manager Travelers Kimberlee Sinclair Director, Global Communications, H.B. Fuller Linda Soranno Vice President & Deputy General Counsel General Mills Julie Zelle Community Leader Directors Emeriti Ted Koenecke Sheila Livingston One Groveland Terrace I Suite 300 1 Minneapolis, MN 55403 1 612.874.7710 1 info @projectsuccess.org I PRINTING COURTESY OF BI WORLDWIDE • Heather Branigin From: David Nelson Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 2:51 PM To: 'Scott'; Ruehl,Jeff,MINN ETON KA,HCN Business Operations Cc: Cathy Ruehl (Cathy.Ruehl @genmills.com); jeff.ruehl @gmail.com; rob.webb1998 @gmail.com; James Hovland; Robert Stewart Subject: RE: Robbery on Wooddale Ave Saturday Night Good afternoon Jeff and Cathy, I'm going to try to address both your e -mail and Mr. Busyn's e-mail in one since this is going out to the group. First, let me start by saying that it does not happen very often where all of our squads are tied up on priority calls. We train with our neighboring agencies and have protocols so when it does happen, we are prepared. Saturday night was one of the rarities. On Saturday night during that time frame, we also has an in progress suspicious vehicle call come in on the west side of the city where Eden Prairie officers responded and handled the call very smoothly. In addressing in progress calls versus "just filing a report." When Mr. Busyn first called, he spoke to the dispatcher very calmly and provided the initial information regarding his vehicle being stolen. At that time, he did not give any information regarding someone in the area, a guy with a possible weapon, or anything about assaultive behavior. This is why it was considered a report call. When Mr. Busyn called back to see if anyone was responding yet, he was advised of the accident and that a squad would respond as soon as one became available. At that time, Mr. Busyn advised the dispatcher that he was out of his house and came across a suspicious person. He told dispatch that he saw this person walked out of a house and walked down the street. The dispatcher repeated the information asking Mr. Busyn if he saw someone walk out of a house and Mr. Busyn yes, reaffirming that the person walked out of a house. He didn't say anything about someone in your backyard. He did not tell the dispatcher what the address was or the name of the people who lived at the house. Mr. Busyn only provided cross street locations of where the person was. With the information of the suspicious person in the area, that raised the call level to a priority response. Since we did not have an Edina officer available yet, we needed to transfer Mr. Busyn to St. Louis Park PD to have an officer respond. In reviewing the St. Louis Park records, the call was dispatched at 2:14 AM and two officers arrived in the area at 2:20 AM. As the officers were checking the area, Edina officers became available and responded, thus St. Louis Park officers did not stop and make contact with Mr. Busyn. Our officers arrived and made contact with Mr. Busyn at 2:29 hours. As far as discussion in our department with the increased presence, we have increased the frequency of patrol officers driving through your neighbor area. Whenever we see an increase in criminal activity in an area within the City, we do focus our patrol efforts in that area in attempt to reduce unwanted activity. • Scott, Thank you for your e -mail and I will attempt to respond to your concerns and questions. Again, we you first called the police, you did not express any concern about the perpetrator still being in the area or any concern about you wife and children who were asleep in the house. From our experience, when a • person is walking through neighborhood checking cars to see if they are unlocked, it is more of a crime of opportunity. If the vehicle is unlocked, they rummage through it and will take anything of value that is easy to take. Usually it is coins out of ashtrays, purses or wallets left in the car, or small electronics left on the seat. If by chance they find the means of being able to easily start the car and drive away in it, they will. When they do, the leave the area with the "huge score" and have no interest in hanging around the area looking for more unlocked vehicle to rummage through. From past experience, normally these types of people are not violent criminals with weapons, they are the type that do not want to draw attention to themselves and only go into vehicles that are unlocked. Seeing as we did not take any other reports of vehicles being tampered with that evening, your house may have been the first place where they discovered unlocked vehicles. We don't know that for sure, but we did not receive additional calls from anyone in the area reporting this type of incident from that night. As far as your concern about your situation could have been a matter of life or death. Whenever someone calls the police who is witnessing possible criminal activity going on, we never want people to put themselves in harm's way. We prefer people look out for their own safety first versus becoming a possible victim. For example, if a person witnesses someone breaking into a house and calls the police, we want the person to stay in a safe area and continue to watch for any activity regarding the person who broke into the house so responding officers can have the information. We would never want the caller to go and try and confront the perpetrator. It seems that since the incident on Saturday night, the suspicious person who saw has become a violent armed person when there is no evidence to support this. I disagree that your neighborhood was "under siege by multiple assailants that were working together." The video you attached is helpful of the one person captured on the footage. I will pass this on to our investigators and to our patrol officers. Obviously we can't prove this was the person who took your vehicle, but it is helpful information. At this time, we'll take anything we can get. Could you tell me the address of the house where this camera is installed so we can pinpoint the location? To address your questions: (Responses in red font) 1) Why would my 911 calls from my cell phone go to St. Louis Park dispatch? Maybe this is a technology issue, but I really want Edina PD to show up when I call 911. 1 can't imagine their police dept is closer to me than the Edina PD HQ mere blocks away. This is a technology issue. Years ago, all cellular phones were routed the MN State Patrol. With technology improvements, things have improved where normally 911 calls placed in Edina will come straight to our dispatch center. When a person is close to another city boarder, it depends on who your cellular carrier is and where the closest tower is and that will determine what dispatch center it goes to. Nothing we can do about that except transfer the calls to the appropriate agency when it happens. That's where we need the caller's patience and understanding while we reroute the call to the proper dispatch center. I'm sure our police department is closer to you residence than St. Louis Park, although we do not station our officers at the police department waiting to get dispatched to calls. They are out in the city on patrol. Another bit of information to consider. If you call 911 from your house on a landline, your address immediately • pops up on our screen and we know exactly where you are calling from. With cell phones, this does not hold 2 true. When you call 911, we don't know the exact location you are calling from. Currently, the initial information we receive is a geographical area based off of the location of the nearest cellar antenna tower that received the signal from your cell phone. We can get additional information to narrow the location, but it does take some time. Technology has not been able to provide that feature for dispatch centers yet, although it is a work in progress. 2) St. Louis Park PD never showed up to investigate the suspicious person I was following. I was outside in front of my home the whole time and did not see any officers until Edina PD showed up over an hour after I made my first of many 911 calls. I think this has been address above and in the other e -mail. St. Louis Park did check the area, but did not make contact with you as our officers were clearing the accident scene and responding. 3) 1 was told by the responding officers that Edina was at minimum police staffing Saturday night. Shouldn't there be a more reliable contingency plan in place to handle overload situations like what happened Saturday night? Like I said, SLP never showed up. When were are operating at minimum staffing levels, that is the level of staffing we need to provide ample coverage on the street. When an major incident occurs, we follow our protocols regarding the mutual aid agreements we have in place, which is what we did on Saturday night. 4) You stated I should have continued speaking with the St. Louis Park dispatcher rather than the Edina dispatcher when I was following the suspect. I had no idea that I was supposed to do this as I was just dialing 911. 1 guess I assumed 911 coordinates a case between municipalities. Why would a resident have to know the intricacies of 911 dispatch when they are just calling for help? 911 dispatch centers and not all tied together with a constant flow of information between cities. St. Louis Park as their own dispatch center and the Edina dispatch center dispatches for not only for Edina, but also for Richfield. Residents do not need to know the intricacies of how dispatch centers and 911 systems work. That's our dispatcher's job to know this and how to transfer calls to the right location for a proper response. We just ask for your patience during the transfer process. Saturday night, after the second call, you sounded frustrated, which I can understand, but I don't think you were hearing what the dispatcher was trying to explain to you as you continued to interrupt and talk over the dispatcher. 5) 1 appreciate your safety tips of locking cars, closing garage doors etc. That being said, we have to live our lives. The reality is I had not even gone to bed and all my house lights were still on when this happened. I had been in progress of loading the vehicle for the next round of dance competition on Sunday. A police presence in our neighborhoods would deter the criminals from even showing up. The brazenness of this crime astounds me. I also just heard a new suburban had all 4 wheels removed in the owners driveway on Indianola two days yesterday. Is the criminal element becoming more brazen as they feel we are more vulnerable? Even the crime lab officer told me while she covers Hennepin County, she spent most of her time in Edina on Saturday night. I'm confident that if the person(s) who took your vehicle would have seen any activity of you going back and forth from the house, they would have continued on down the road. From past experience, I believe this was more of a crime of opportunity. We do conduct a lot of residential patrol, but with the number of neighborhoods throughout the city, it is not possible to be able to have an officer stationed in every neighborhood. When we identify a neighborhood that is experiencing an increase in crime, we focus on stepping up patrols in that neighborhood to address issues. i1 am aware of the incident of the incident that occurred on Juanita Ave. the following evening. I don't think the criminal are becoming more brazen. We have had similar incidents occur throughout the city over the years. As far as the crime lab deputy, yes we did keep her busy that particular night. Trying to collect evidence over that large of an area is time consuming. is I hope this correspondence helps with understanding how things transpired that evening. As the Chief of our police department, I am very sincere about providing good service to our residents and keeping Edina as a safe place to live. Your concerns will be shared and discussed with our supervisory staff and we will evaluate the series of events from that evening to see if there needs to be changes in our protocols. Thank you Dave Dave Nelson, Chief of Police 952 - 826 -0487 1 Fax 952 -826 -1607 DNelson@EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov/PoliGe Disclaimer: Information in this message or an attachment may be government data and thereby subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, may be subject to attorney - client or work product privilege, may be confidential, privileged, proprietary, or otherwise protected, and the unauthorized review, copying, retransmission, or other use or disclosure of the information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. From: Scott [ mailto:scott.busyn @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 10:21 PM To: Ruehl,]eff,MINNETONKA,HCN Business Operations Cc: David Nelson; Cathy Ruehl (Cathy.Ruehl @genmills.com); jeff.ruehl @gmail.com; rob.webb1998 @gmail.com; James Hovland; Robert Stewart Subject: Re: Robbery on Wooddale Ave Saturday Night Chief Nelson, I am going to chime in here as I was included on this email chain. Before I begin, I want to say I have the upmost respect for all the men and women members of our law enforcement community. To this day I remember the heroics of Officer Mike Blood as a reason I feel secure living in Edina. I must say, however, that my experience with the Edina PD last Saturday night was very surprising and disturbing. I have lived in Edina for 23 years and have never had a reason to call 911 until last Saturday night. Before I called on my stolen car, I checked with my daughter who was at prom, as well as my "adventurous" 15 year old daughter to see if either of them had taken the car. Once I realized my car was truly stolen I called 911. Since my garage motion light was on I was very concerned that the perpetrator was still in the area. My wife and three daughters were asleep in the house. I was fearful of what was going on and did expect an officer to show up in a matter of minutes. When I called again several minutes later I was made aware of the terrible traffic accident on York. I do agree responding to a potentially fatal traffic accident is a higher priority than a stolen car call. However, my situation could have also been a matter of life and death and I do expect the Edina PD to respond. After repeated calls and no officer I responding, I did feel somewhat vulnerable to whomever was operating on the street. I felt compelled to venture out on my block on my bike to at least create a physical presence under the streetlights on Wooddal.e. I almost immediately encountered an individual at Ruehls property. He was a young black male wearing black sweats and sweatshirt. I'm only describing him as black because he was. I by • no means intend to assume he committed a crime just because he was black. If he were white male or a blonde girl I would have still asked them what they were doing. While he very well could have been a friend of a neighbor, the timing and his suspiciousness being on Ruehls driveway gave me pause. I was really hoping at that point that one of your officers would roll up. I got nervous when he reached in his back pocket (could have been a phone, but I was pretty scared) so I told him to keep walking. At that point I called 911 again to try and get officers to arrive, explaining that there may be a suspect. I followed him for several blocks hoping that officers would arrive. Eventually, he hopped in a car (I didn't see it, but heard the car speed off) on Edina Boulevard and was gone. I attached video of someone walking back and forth on my block of Wooddale between 12:15 and 12:30. I don't know if this is the same person I saw, but his appearance and clothing look like who I encountered. I was very disappointed that we missed the chance to catch this person if by chance they were connected to my stolen vehicle. As you stated in your email, there should have been a response to the "in progress" crime as I was following a suspect. My point is, I feel my block was somewhat under siege by multiple assailants that were working together. Once again, I feel this situation should have had a fast response from an officer. It wasn't just an administrative report of a stolen car. In reading your response to Mr. Ruehl, I have the following questions 1) Why would my 911 calls from my cell phone go to St. Louis Park dispatch? Maybe this is a technology issue, but I really want Edina PD to show up when I call 911. I can't imagine their police dept is closer to me than the Edina PD HQ mere blocks away. 2) St. Louis Park PD never showed up to investigate the suspicious person I was following. I was outside in front of my home the whole time and did not see any officers until Edina PD showed up over an hour after I made my first of many 911 calls. 3) I was told by the responding officers that Edina was at minimum police staffing Saturday night. Shouldn't there be a more reliable contingency plan in place to handle overload situations like what happened Saturday night? Like I said, SLP never showed up. 4) You stated I should have continued speaking with the St. Louis Park dispatcher rather than the Edina dispatcher when I was following the suspect. I had no idea that I was supposed to do this as I was just dialing 911. I guess I assumed 911 coordinates a case between municipalities. Why would a resident have to know the intricacies of 911 dispatch when they are just calling for help? 5) I appreciate your safety tips of locking cars, closing garage doors etc. That being said, we have to live our lives. The reality is I had not even gone to bed and all my house lights were still on when this happened. I had been in progress of loading the vehicle for the next round of dance competition on Sunday. A police presence in our neighborhoods would deter the criminals from even showing up. The brazenness of this crime astounds me. I also just heard a new suburban had all 4 wheels removed in the owners driveway on Indianola two days yesterday. Is the criminal element becoming more brazen as they feel we are more vulnerable? Even the crime lab officer told me while she covers Hennepin County, she spent most of her time in Edina on Saturday night. I really don't care about the car. Yes, it is only 5 months old and it was my wife's first nice vehicle after 12 years of minivans :)! I am more concerned about how I feel less safe and vulnerable after this incident. Thank you for taking the time to read this email. I have no desire to bash the Edina PD as I respect the work you do. The indignity of this incident and my desire to feel secure again living in Edina compelled me to reach out to you with this email. Thank you, Scott Busyn 4615 Wooddale 952- 807 -8765 On May 13, 2015, at 6:03 PM, "Ruehl,Jeff,MINNETONKA,HCN Business Operations" <Jeff.Ruehl!c us.nestle.com> wrote: David, Thank you for your response and I agree that residents need to do more to reduce the crimes in the neighborhood. This has been a chronic issue but it also seems that the thieves have become much more brazen as with the theft of Mr. Busyn's car and I just heard about an recent incident where 4 wheels were taken off a car. I still have concerns about how you determine what is in the interest of public safety vs. just filling a report. The theft of Mr. Busyn's car does not make it to the top of the list on public safety concerns but I do believe that someone prowling in my back yard at 12:30 at night should be taken seriously. I think it naive to think that incidents like this will continue to only result in thefts vs. someone being assaulted. I have two young girls and their safety is an extremely high priority for me. I am copying Rob Web who manages our neighborhood communication and ask that he send out a reminder to the residents to increase their attentiveness. I would also ask that given the recent surge in these type of incidents some discussion happen in your department about an increased presence or visibility. Thank You Jeff & Cathy Ruehl 4623 Wooddale Ave From: David Nelson [mailto:DNelson@EdinaMNyov] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 1:54 PM To: Ruehl,Jeff,MINNETONKA,HCN Business Operations; Cathy Ruehl (Cathy.Ruehl genmills.com) Cc: James Hovland; Robert Stewart Subject: RE: Robbery on Wooddale Ave Saturday Night Jeff and Cathy, Thank you for your e -mail and I will do my best to respond to your concerns as I have reviewed our reports, phones calls, and dispatch records to obtain as much information as I could. When Mr. Busyn called, he told the dispatcher that someone had stolen his vehicle out of his garage sometime within the last two hours. Mr. Busyn told the dispatcher he did not see or hear the vehicle drive away. With the information given to dispatch at the time of his first call, this would be considered a report call, (something was stolen, nothing was witnessed, and the caller has no idea who committed the crime) and the caller would advised that we would dispatch a squad to take the report. Normally, our staffing levels allow us to dispatch an officer right away, but on that night right after the dispatcher hung up with Mr. Busyn, one of our officers came across a horrific accident on York Ave. The debris trail of scattered car parts spanned about 140 yards and at the end of that trail was an overturned vehicle with severely injured occupants still inside. With debris trail being that long, it was very apparent that the vehicle had been traveling at an extremely high rate of speed prior to losing control. All officers on the street responded to the scene along with Richfield officers to assist in redirecting traffic around the accident scene and assisting with emergency first aid. When Mr. Busyn called a second time, he supplied more information regarding two of his other vehicles on the property were rummaged through, but nothing appeared missing. He was advised that all of our squads were presently tied up 40 on an injury crash and an officer would respond when they were clear from the crash. Twelve minutes later is when some confusion occurred. It sounds like when Mr. Busyn was out looking around and saw the suspicious male, he called in on his cell phone and due to closeness of the city boarder, the call when directly to St. Louis Park dispatch instead of Edina dispatch. Once St. Louis Park dispatch realized the Mr. Busyn was calling about an Edina incident, they transferred the call to our dispatch center. When Mr. Busyn started providing the information regarding the suspicious person in the area, we had to transfer the call back to St. Louis Park and requesting their assistance in responding to the suspicious person call as our officers were still providing services to the injured persons involved in the accident. St. Louis Park did dispatch two officers who responded and checked the area for the suspicious person. As the officers were checking the area, an Edina squad was able to clear from the accident scene and respond to Mr. Busyn's call. The Edina officer met up with the St. Louis Park officers to be briefed on their findings and then responded to make contact with My. Busyn and take the report. The Edina Police Department does have a mutual aid agreement with all of our surrounding agencies as well as the rest of the cities throughout Hennepin County. It is common for other agencies to come into our city and assist with calls and well as our officers leaving the city to assist neighboring agencies when a major incident occurs. Let's look at it from another angle. If we were to have an active shooter incident at Southdale or in one of our schools. All on duty officers would be responding to that incident in the interest of public safety. During this incident, if a person were to call in to file a report for something that happened in the past. The person would be told that we don't have anyone to respond as there is a high priority incident occurring in the city and that we would send someone out to take the report when we are available. Now, if someone were to call in with some type of emergency, we would call on the closest boarding agency to have an officer(s) respond. We have trained with our neighboring agencies so we are • better prepared for these types of incidents. We have a defined protocol of how officers would respond to the emergency incident and how some officers would remain available for other emergency calls. I hope this helps addresses your concerns. The Edina Police Department does take pride in providing excellent service to our residents. If a person calls in with some type of emergency or in progress crime occurring, an officer will be on the way, in certain circumstances, it may be an officer from a neighboring agency, but we are all licensed through the State of Minnesota. I can understand where Mr. Busyn did not think St. Louis Park Police were not assisting as he was very upset and short with their dispatcher as he thought he was getting the runaround. In reality, with Mr. Busyn following the person, it is more valuable for him to be providing the St. Louis Park dispatcher the information as they had officers responding versus continuing to talk to the Edina dispatcher. We always stress to our residents the importance of closing garage doors, making sure your vehicle is locked, don't leave valuables in your vehicle, and above all, do not leave your keys or ignition FOB in your vehicle. If these safety tips were followed that evening, this incident may not have occurred. Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns. Dave Nelson, Chief of Police <image002.gif> 952 -826 -0487 1 Fax 952 -826 -1607 DNelson a(a)EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov /Police Disclaimer: Information in this message or an attachment may be government data and thereby subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, may be subject to attorney- client or work product privilege, may be confidential, privileged, proprietary, or otherwise protected, and the unauthorized review, copying, retransmission, or other use or disclosure of the information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. From: Ruehl,JefP,MINNETONKA,HCN Business Operations [ma ilto :Jeff.Ruehl@ us, nestle. com] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 9:40 AM To: David Nelson; Cathy Ruehl (Cathy.Ruehl @genmills.com) Cc: James Hovland; Robert Stewart Subject: Robbery on Wooddale Ave Saturday Night 40 Dave, I am writing you concerning a robbery that occurred on the 4600 block of Wooddale Ave late Saturday night. My neighbor, Scott Busyn, at 4615 Wooddale Ave had his car stolen while he was sitting in his house. He noticed it was gone just minutes after it was taken, called the police and went to go look down the street. He saw someone suspicious coming out of my back yard at 4623 Wooddale Ave. He again called the police and described the person as a young black man, the dispatcher scolded him that he should not racially profile people. Scott knows my family and knows that this person simply did not belong in my back yard at 12:30 at night. After nine calls and being bounced between the Edina and St. Louis Park police departments someone from the Edina police finally showed up over an hour after the first call. This is very concerning to me. At the last minute I changed plans that originally would have left my 17 year old daughter Lindsey alone at that time. Bob you know Lindsey from Twin Cities Youth Rowing. You can imagine my concern that someone was in my back yard late Saturday night and is noticed and reported to the police and it takes over an hour for someone to show up. If someone had come in my house how long would it have taken the police to show up then? I would be interested in your take on the events and what contingency plans are in place if your staff is unable to show up promptly in these types of situations. Jeff and Cathy Ruehl 4623 Wooddale Ave 952 - 240 -9494 • • Heather Branigin isFrom: Kristine Donatelle <donatellek @icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 4:52 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com; Kevin Staunton; Mary Brindle Subject: ECLC proposal concerns and CUP requests Importance: High Dear Edina City Council members, Please consider my concerns below regarding the proposed Edina Community Lutheran Church expansion. understand you will be reviewing the preliminary plans next week at your meeting. The new plans were recently shared with neighbors and we had several questions and concerns. I already shared this with Cary Teague and the Planning Commission. Sincerely, Kristine Donatelle Begin forwarded message: From: Kristine Donatelle <donatellek()-icloud.com> Subject: ECLC proposal concerns and CUP requests Date: May 12, 2015 2:35:59 PM CDT To: cteague(Wedinamn.gov Dear Cary, Thank you for meeting with me today to discuss the new Edina Community Lutheran Church expansion proposal. I live on Woodcrest Drive, directly south of the proposed addition across Minnehaha Creek. My home is situated directly across the creek from the church. Within my view is the existing parking lot and floodlights, surrounding chain link fence, church structure, and refuse bins. I have the following concerns about the proposed addition that I would like addressed by the Conditional Use Permit and site plans: Please add screening for the existing parking lot on the west side of the proposed addition. As it stands, the south side neighbors have to look at an unsightly and unconcealed paved parking lot, exposed refuse bins, and a chain link fence in disrepair. Existing tree leaf cover DOES NOT conceal the parking lot 6 months out of the year. This must be addressed for me to consider supporting the proposed addition. I would like to see the proposed new parking lot screening of 4 -foot arborvitae trees continue along the entire parking lot. The unsightly existing chain link fence should also be removed. I would also like the refuse bins to be moved and concealed behind landscape or structural screening. • _ Please modify parking lot lighting for the existing parking lot as well as the newly proposed lot. The existing three parking lot floodlights are very obtrusive, glaring and noticeable from across the creek. I would like to see softer, modified parking lot lighting that is less obtrusive to neighbors and the environment. I am sure the neighbors next to the new parking lot would appreciate that as well. I understand code standards have changed since this harsh lighting was first installed. .I Stormwater runoff and watershed impact. With such a massive new 8,000- square -foot structure and roof proposed to be constructed on the edge of a steeply eroding hill, I am greatly concerned about foundational support and footings for this new structure and any deck that it includes. Several mature trees stand next to the proposed expansion area and parsonage lot and we prefer that these NOT be removed to make way for this addition. This wooded area provides habitat and shelter for wildlife like deer, Great Blue Heron, water fowl, mallard ducks, turtles and many other species. We would like to see in detail how the wooded area below the church will be impacted by any necessary retaining wall structures, catch basins, drainage pipes or clearing of trees. We would prefer that no mature trees be removed to make way for this addition as it would be harmful to the peace and enjoyment of neighbors, the community and the wildlife habitat. The trees also help with noise control. The Watershed District should make every attempt to protect the 50 -foot wetlands buffer along the creek below. I am wondering if any consideration may be given to reducing the height, size and scope of the addition as it seems out of proportion to the existing building. - I am also concerned about the traffic the new parking lot might introduce to the intersection of Halifax and 54th Street and would like to see the results of the prerequisite traffic impact study. Thank you for considering my concerns and those of other south side neighbors. Sincerely, • Kristine Donatelle • Heather Branigin • From: Sandy Simmons <ssimmons47 @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 10:32 PM To: Robert Stewart; Kevin Staunton; Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Ann Swenson Cc: jemitche11922 @gmaii.com; caryschilling @gmail.com; jdarice @msn.com; carol cushmore; asc1881 @aol.com; angiellarson @comcast.net; jeff.hovanec @cambriaUSA.com; Pat Lawrence Subject: Re: Bruce Avenue Parking Bob, I appreciate your taking the time to respond. I have also seen Kevin Staunton's response to Pat Lawrence which is very similar. I appreciate the fact that neither of you were on the council at the time of the Dec. 9 council meeting you both refer to. After listening to the link of that council meeting, there is only more frustration with the inability of the Edina City Council to listen to its citizens. EVERY resident who presented at that meeting affirmed the desire of our Arden Park streets to maintain their 30 foot width, that anything less than 30 feet was going to be a hardship to residents that had lived on these blocks for years. There wasn't one presentation to the contrary. The argument by the council now that we all TOO LATE - we did not participate or listen at the appropriate time - that somehow it is our fault - holds any credence. There were citizens trying very respectfully to be heard at a point in time that was NOT TOO LATE. The council simply didn't listen - they had a plan and we didn't fall into line with what they wanted to do. The narrowing of our streets and the reduction of our parking by 50% are decisions that will impact every one of us in Arden Park for decades. "We have already decided" is a very poor excuse for a decision that was made by a select few • who will never have to live with it. Sandy On May 14, 2015, at 6:52 PM, Robert Stewart <RStewart @EdinaMN.gov> wrote: > Sandy > Thanks for your message. > I was traveling last weekend, and have been working hard to catch up this week. Sorry for the delayed reply. > All of the City Council members have spent a significant amount of time on this topic in the past eight days. The topic that was on the agenda last week had nothing to do with parking on Bruce and in order to have a public hearing on a new issue, such as this, we are required by law to give notice of the hearing well in advance of the meeting. > I think that Kevin Staunton and I, as the newest members of the Council, have had to invest even more time on this subject. Part of this response will borrow language from some other communications as a means of saving time and still being thorough. •> Thank you for summarizing your thoughts in the e -mail. That is very helpful. In addition to the testimony at last Wednesday's City Council meeting„ I have messages from a number of your neighbors uniformly advocating for parking on both sides of Bruce Avenue south of 50th. I appreciate that this is a personal issue for you and your neighbors; you all clearly care a lot about this and are — with the best of motivations — trying very hard to create the best possible outcome for the place you live. > Back in December, before I was added to the Council, I attended the the public hearing on the plan for the Bruce Avenue redevelopment. (You can seethe meeting at http: / /bit.ly /2014Dec9StreetMtg / December 9, 2014.) The issue of parking was discussed at great length at that meeting. Cary Teague advocated for parking on both sides of the street during his comments. Karen McElrath discussed pedestrian safety concerns associated with narrowing Bruce Avenue during her remarks. The Council — in over an hour of discussion on just this project — had extensive and spirited debate on this topic of parking. All five members of the Council participated in a discussion that focused on this precise issue — parking on both sides of Bruce Avenue and the other 27 -foot wide streets. At one point it looked like two -sided parking was going to prevail but, by the end of that discussion, the Council voted to limit parking to one side on Bruce and the other 27 -foot wide streets on the condition that the limited parking be reviewed in one year. The Council listened carefully to the residents of the neighborhood, decided to remove the planned sidewalks as the residents requested, but on the issue of parking decided to restrict it to one side, in part out of safety concerns because of the decision to remove the sidewalks from the plan. In my judgment, the issue was fully vetted. > I don't know how I would have voted on the issue had I been on the Council then. What I can tell you is that there are good arguments on each side of the issue and those arguments were raised on December 9. 1 cannot in good conscience at this time insist that we re -visit this issue now. It would be unfair to the Council members and other residents who wrestled with this in December. This is especially true when the December decision included a condition requiring that the issue be reconsidered in a year. > As far as I can tell, the price of waiting to reconsider this issue for a year (as the Council's decision required) is the potential to have to remove four parking signs at the end of that year. When I balance that consequence against the damage I think is done by insisting that my colleagues who deliberated and decided a difficult issue be required to do it over again just a few months later, I come out on the side of waiting to reconsider this at the time they suggested. > I know the issue of sustaining a fair and credible "process" may not be a hot issue for you and your neighbors, but I believe it is important to the effective long -term governance of the City. The Council must do its best to make the right decisions and then move on. We cannot re -open issues quickly or repeatedly when the outcome is disappointing to some. > Thank you for considering these facts. I will probably share this communication with City Manager Scott Neal and he may share it with others. > If you would like to talk further, I will make time for that. > Thank you. > - Bob Stewart > rstewart @edinamn.gov > 952 -833 -9559 • From: Sandy Simmons [ssimmons47 @gmail.com] • Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 6:43 PM • To: Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com • Cc: jemitche11922 @gmail.com; caryschilling @gmail.com; jdarice @msn.com; carol cushmore; asc1881 @aol.com; i i ( r • angiellarson @comcast.net; jeff.hovanec @cambriaUSA.com • > Subject: Bruce Avenue Parking > Jim Hovland, Kevin Staunton, Bob Stewart, Ann Swenson, and Mary Brindle, •> We live at 5038 Bruce Place and are extremely disappointed the city council is refusing to listen to the concerns of our entire block of residents regarding the decision to allow parking on only one side of our street. There has been no logical reason given to support this decision other than it has already been decided so you can't change it. Yes you can. If it isn't broken, why are you trying to 'fix' it? With all the residents on the street opposed to what you are going to do, why isn't the council listening? What is your reasoning? On an issue directly impacting only our street, shouldn't the council be representing our concerns? Who are you representing with this decision? > We don't want unnecessary signs in our yards and we NEED the parking spaces. We will be severely inconvenienced to not have any parking in front of our house and along our side of the street. Residents in the cul -de -sac will have NO on street parking available to them. That makes no sense. If the concern is slowing the traffic through the street, parking on both sides is a traffic calming measure. There is extreme frustration when the 'powers that be' make an arbitrary unnecessary decision effecting our daily lives in the face of 100% opposition. > We urge you to restore our faith in the Edina city government by listening and making the choice to eliminate these unnecessary and unwanted no parking signs and the inconvenience they will bring to all of us. It is very difficult to understand why you are deciding against every single resident of the area effected. There is NO opposition to parking on both sides of the street except by the city council and you have given no valid reason for not supporting us. It is clearly not too late to make the decision to maintain the existing parking on both sides of Bruce Avenue and Bruce Place and SIMPLY DECIDE TO NOT PUT UP THE SIGNS. If, at anytime in the future, there are concerns or complaints the signs can be added. Common sense is to not put up the signs unless they are deemed necessary in the future. Please use common sense and support the residents that your decision is directly effecting. > Cal and Sandy Simmons • r: Heather Branigin From: Ray Becker <raymanbecker @yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 11;52 PM To: James Hovland Subject: LTR Corridor Attachments: Over Waterjpg; Skybus_at_Station jpg; Memphis_front_viewjpg Did you know that a suspended monorail only cost 1/4 as much to build in 1/2 the time, has less maintenance than a Light Rail and has never had an accident with a car in over 100 years of use. Did you know that a suspended monorail only cost 1/4 as much to build in 1/2 the time, has less maintenance than a Light Rail and has never had an accident with a car in over 100 years of use. Now I don't mean a "Monorail" or a "Gondola" but a light rail with the wheels above the cars instead of under it. Just think positive for a moment. No exposed overhead wires, no miles of utilities to relocate, soil conditions wouldn't make a much bigger impact than crossing a river, snow and ice would not slow it down and the only (that's ONE) fatality was an Elephant about 100 years ago that got spooked and literally rocked the boat. We haven't even made one year with that kind of safety. What about elevated Stations? We already do that and for that matter, "What business wouldn't mind making the allowances we made for the Skyways (Tax subsided of course) and have customers dropped right in the middle of third floor instead of just outside the "Front Door "? So there you have it, been in OTHER COUNTRIES for over 100 years, as quiet as light rail, cheaper to maintain, after the supports are in the spans can be trucked and hoisted into place from a central build site, and "Stop Lights ?! We don need no stinking Stop Lights! You cannot hit a car from 20 feet up! • r: ■ ma -IV i , F�w .svi � Community � tt a w - A place to gather as a community and increase individual wellness A whole community, whole person center for Edina. 100% PUBLIC • CJ 0 • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.Publ!cGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com Serve the entire community through wellness, arts and a community gathering area. Framework's Vision JA Establish a community commons as a multi-pur- pose facility for a wide audience (e.g., whole body, whole life, health and wellness) and as a focal point and central gathering space... Framework, page 14 A Single Destination THE COMMUNITY'S LIVING ROOM 2 Community Center Proposal A community center is the heart of the community. It Ad As a single is a public place, one we all built, where we directly feel the destination, the city's commitment to our well- being. It is the place you go for Community Center will become the community personal enrichment, and discover you are part of an active "Living room "that and welcoming community... promotes civic pride Valerie Otani, Hillsboro, Oregon resident about their new community center and enhances the a The Community Center will become the gathering place for quality life for all residents... citizens of all ages and abilities: a place to learn, play, create, grow, Hillsboro Oregon laugh, experience and just hang out with friends. Community Center summary document Hillsboro document 2 Community Center Proposal PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com -- COMMUNITY CENTER CONCEPT A facility that can be used by all residents. Community Spaces Arts and Culture Activity Spaces Community spaces are the heart of the community center Including multi- purpose room(s), informal gathering spaces, study spaces, classes, special events /parties. Supporting Spaces Arts and culture space includes the visual arts as well as the performing arts. The community performance space could also be used for other community events. Restaurant Activity spaces would promote health and wellness. Included in activity spaces would be groupfitness studio, a walking/jogging track, weight room, lap pool and recreational pool and agymnaisurrm Childcare space is included for young families. Outdoor Spaces These spaces are required to support the community center - the reception area, storage spaces, mechanical rooms and other operational spaces. Community Center Proposal The community center would host a restaurant, similarto Tin Fish at Braemar. It would be preferable to use a restaurant that will attract teens and young residents, but is still healthy and appealing to other generations. Create a prominent green space that acts as a community commons and could include uses such as: sculpture garden, outdoor ampitheatre and /or ice rink in winter. in addition, use / reserve outdoor space for transit and parking. • • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW wwwPublicGrandview.cor, /c.nt.ct@PLiblicGrandview.com MUI-.--fl-GENERATIONALGi�-lHE�i-i'ING SIPACES Places to gather, to learn, to work and to hold special events 0 S w Casual activities lounge area Teen area and multi-generational @ 1000 SF A place for everyone. For seniors, teens, families and singles. A community center would provide a place to meet, to work together and to play together. 1,200 SF 205.00 $246,000 2,000 SF 205.00 $410,000 Game room 1,000 SF 215.00 $215,000 Community Room - flexible space 3,000 SF 230.00 $690,000 Multi-purpose classroom - flexible space 1,000 SF 230.00 $230,000 Community/ caterer kitchen 800 SF 355.00 $284,000 Special events / party room 700 SF 255.00 $178,500 Meeting room/ conference room i 600 SF 205.00 $123,000 $183,000 $ 30,000 - — -- - - -------- - $ 71,400 0�- $2,660, 600 --I 4 Community Center Proposal PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandvlew.com Create an activity center that benefits all residents of Edina Provide a wellness and activity center that attracts all ages. pac 77 17, .. Gymnasium 6,000 $195.00 �.- $1,170,000 Walking /jogging track 8,000 $225.00 $1,800,000 2 multipurpose group exercise 4,400 $210.00 $924,000 Cardio /weight room 6,000 $225.00 $1,350,000 Fitness studio 1,000 $215.00 $215,000 Wellness center /fitness assessment 1,000 $225.00 $225,000 Climbing structure 1,600 $210.00 $336,000 Childcare 1,000 $200.00 $200,000 Gym storage 1 300 $154.00 $46,200 Multi- purpose, cardio /weight and childcare storage 600 $165.00 I $99,000 TOTA[ ACTIVITIES SQUARE FEET 299 D IM et Community Center Proposal PUBLIC / A family-friendly pool and lap pool Aquatic center that isopen year around. space SqUare footage Cost per SF Cost Recreational pool 6,000 $345.00 $2,070,000 Lap pool 7,500 $345.00 $2,587,500 Pool mechanicals and aquatics storage 1,600 $189.00 $302,400 Thermo/ hydrotherapy 250 $500.00 $125,000 Pool sanitation storage 140 $145.00 $20,300 First aid office 80 $214.00 $17,120 Poo I construction $1,260,000 Recreationai pool equipment TOTAL AQUATJCS-SQUARE FOOTAGE- 15,570 0 Cmmunilty Center Proposal www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com PERFORMING ARTS Create a performing arts space i GPRA DVS EW I A performance space that can be utilized in multiple ways. • Community performance room (flexible/ movable seating) iT4 iLTll191 Storage $875,000 5120.000 �,7U4.000 ? 1 JL,000 The performing arts and visual arts can share spaces such as restrooms, front of house (lobby). • Community Center Proposal 7 PUBLIC GRANDVIEW EDINA ARTS CENTER Create a new home for the Edina Art Center Gallery • Large Studios Small Studios Specialized Labs Administration Offices Gift 5hop Pottery/ Ceramics Studio Metal Arts Glass www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com VISUAL ARTS Based on Scenario A in the Schuler Shook document. Used NET square footage. 1700 Photography /Jewelry $340,000 700 $ 200 Conference Room 1300 $ 200 $260,000 Rental Studio Space $ 200 $160,000 400 [Storage $80,000 300 $ 200 Receiving 3500 $ 200 $700,000 2200 $ 200 $440,0000 TOTAL ART CENTER SQUARE FOOTAGE: $ 200 $200,0000 1000 400 $ 200 $ 200 8 1000 $ 200 $200,000 i —$2001 $200, 0 250 $ 200 1 $ 50,000 I 5 550 $3 110 000 www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com VISUAL ARTS Based on Scenario A in the Schuler Shook document. Used NET square footage. 1700 $ 200 $340,000 700 $ 200 $140,000 1300 $ 200 $260,000 800 $ 200 $160,000 400 $ 200 $80,000 300 $ 200 $60,000 3500 $ 200 $700,000 2200 $ 200 $440,0000 1000 $ 200 $200,0000 1000 400 $ 200 $ 200 �$20�0,000 I $80,000 1000 $ 200 $200,000 i —$2001 $200, 0 250 $ 200 1 $ 50,000 I 5 550 $3 110 000 Community Center Proposal PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com GENERAL SPACES Miscellaneous spaces required to run a community center �ke EM L R • �r mm Lobby 1200 $230.00 $276,000 Reception bay /access 300 $205.00 $61500 Vending area Locker room - women 150 $255.00 $38,250 1,700 $255.00. $433,500 Locker room - men 1,500 $255.00 $382,500 Locker room - family 300 $230.00 $69,000 4 offices - manager and coordinators 480 $189.00 $90,720 3 staff offices 240 $194.00 $46560 Maintenance / receiving offices 500 $168.00 $84,000 Supporting spaces /storage NO 480 $180.00 $86,400 Community Center Proposal • n PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PlublicGrandview.com TIM Mechanical, circulation, etc Community Center Proposal PUBLIC GRANDVIEW is www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrand\,Iew.com RESTAURANT A private food provider that is healthy and appealing to al I ages. • NOTE: ESTIMATED SIZE AND COST PER SQUARE FOOT. COST PER SQUARE FOOT WAS ARRIVED AT USING COST PER SQUARE FOOT OF KITCHEN AREA. • Community Center Proposal • • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandvlew.com COMMUNITY CENTER TOTALS ESTIMATED square footage and costs. Subject to change upon further study. INDOOR SPACE k� • :ri�r_a Cif;+ . , t".uss.,, �.�': � i``. i i n' .�M -a _ -. $ 2,660,600 Activity spaces 29,900 $ 6,365,200 Aquatics space 15,570 $ 7,267,320 Performing space 7,500 $ 1,631,000 Art center 15,500 $ 3,110,000 General space 6,850 $1,568,430 12 Community Center Proposal To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: May 19, 2015 Subject: Correspondence Action Requested: No action is necessary. m y 1888 Agenda Item #: IX. A. Action 0 Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Attachment: Attached is correspondence received since the last packet was delivered to Council Members. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 n • May 8, 2015 The Honorable James Hovland Mayor, City of Edina City Hall 4801 West 50t" Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Hovland: IN REPLY REFER TO: COMMENT RES Community: City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota Community No.: 270160 This is in response to an email dated January 28, 2015, from Laura Alder, Water Resources Coordinator for the City of Edina, regarding the stillwater elevation for Lake Edina as presented on the revised Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, dated August 17, 2012. Please note that only those submittals that relate to the addition or modification of the proposed flood hazard information (i.e., Base Flood Elevations, base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area boundaries, zone designations, or regulatory floodways) shown on the FIRM and in the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report that satisfy the data requirements defined in Title 44, Chapter 1, Part 67 of the Code of Federal Regulations are considered appeals. Because your submittal did not meet these criteria, FEMA has processed it as a `comment.' We have determined that changes to the revised preliminary FIRM dated August 17, 2012 are warranted based on the submitted data and will incorporate the necessary changes into the final version of the FIRM. Once we have incorporated these changes, we will proceed with finalizing the FIRM and FIS report. Please submit any comments regarding this resolution within 30 days of the date of this letter to the following address: FEMA Region V Mitigation Division 536 South Clark Street, Sixth Floor Chicago, Illinois 60605 Attention: Bill Heyse, Regional Engineer At the end of the 30 -day period, FEMA will address any additional comments that are submitted. FEMA will then finalize the FIRM and FIS report by issuing a Letter of Final Determination (LFD). The LFD will explain the adoption/compliance process and will state when the FIRM and FIS report will become effective. www.fema.gov U.S. Department of Homeland Security FEMA Region V 536 South Clark Street, Sixth Floor Chicago, Illinois 60605 a�,c�FyT 5 ° FEMA IN REPLY REFER TO: COMMENT RES Community: City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota Community No.: 270160 This is in response to an email dated January 28, 2015, from Laura Alder, Water Resources Coordinator for the City of Edina, regarding the stillwater elevation for Lake Edina as presented on the revised Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, dated August 17, 2012. Please note that only those submittals that relate to the addition or modification of the proposed flood hazard information (i.e., Base Flood Elevations, base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area boundaries, zone designations, or regulatory floodways) shown on the FIRM and in the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report that satisfy the data requirements defined in Title 44, Chapter 1, Part 67 of the Code of Federal Regulations are considered appeals. Because your submittal did not meet these criteria, FEMA has processed it as a `comment.' We have determined that changes to the revised preliminary FIRM dated August 17, 2012 are warranted based on the submitted data and will incorporate the necessary changes into the final version of the FIRM. Once we have incorporated these changes, we will proceed with finalizing the FIRM and FIS report. Please submit any comments regarding this resolution within 30 days of the date of this letter to the following address: FEMA Region V Mitigation Division 536 South Clark Street, Sixth Floor Chicago, Illinois 60605 Attention: Bill Heyse, Regional Engineer At the end of the 30 -day period, FEMA will address any additional comments that are submitted. FEMA will then finalize the FIRM and FIS report by issuing a Letter of Final Determination (LFD). The LFD will explain the adoption/compliance process and will state when the FIRM and FIS report will become effective. www.fema.gov • We appreciate your community's comments and commitment to having the most accurate flood hazard information available reflected on the FIRM and in the FIS report. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Bill Heyse of my office either by telephone at (312) 408 -5323 or by e -mail at WilliamHeyse @fema.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Christine Stack Director, Mitigation Division FEMA Region V cc: Scott Neal, City Manager, City of Edina Laura Alder, Water Resources Coordinator, City of Edina Suzanne Jiwani, Engineer, MDNR Ceil Strauss, Minnesota State National Flood Insurance Program Coordinator • • www.feina.gov MA Metropolitan Council May 14, 2015 James Hovland, Mayor City Of Edina 4801 50th St W Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Hovland: The Metropolitan Council has prepared preliminary population and household estimates for your community as of April 1, 2014. This is an annual process governed by Minnesota Statutes 473.24. Please note that these estimates are different from the Council's draft local forecasts that your community recently had the opportunity to review. Forecasts look ahead to the coming decades; the annual estimates look backwards in time to the previous year. 2014 Annual Population Estimate The Metropolitan Council estimates that the City of Edina had 50,261 people and 21,645 households as of April 1, 2014. Household size averaged 2.31 persons per household. • How was this estimate calculated? We estimate households and population with a housing- stock -based method, which involves three questions: 1. How many housing units does the community have? We estimate housing units with data from our annual surveys of residential construction and manufactured housing parks. 2. How many of these housing units are occupied? We estimate the number of households by examining occupancy rates in the community for different housing types. Data come from the U.S. Census Bureau. 3. How many people lived in these occupied housingunits? We estimate the population in households by examining the average household sizes in the community for different housing types. These data also come from the U.S. Census Bureau. We add the group quarters population from our annual survey. This letter includes a report with the data inputs and calculations used to develop the preliminary estimates. For more information, visit http:// stats. metcstate. mn .us /stats/aboutestimates.aspx , or contact me at 651- 602 -1513. How can my community provide feedback on this estimate? We welcome discussion of the 2014 preliminary estimates and invite you to review and comment on them. Please send any written comments or questions to Matt Schroeder, Metropolitan Council Research, 390 Robert Street North, Saint Paul, MN 55101; or by e-mail to Matt.Schroedergmetc.state.mn.us. Under Minnesota Statutes 473.24, we must receive your comments, questions or specific objections, in writing, by Wednesday, June 24. What happens after my community provides feedback? The Council will certify final estimates by July 15, 2015 for state government use in allocating local government aid and street aid. Sincerely, 4 ( _ `14a, • Matt Schroeder Senior Researcher www. metrocouncil. org 390 Robert Street North • St. Paul, MN 55101 -1805 • (651) 602 -1000 • Fax (651) 602 -1550 • TTY (651) 291 -0904 An Equal Opportunity Employer 2014 Annual Population Estimates . Edina city, Hennepin County, Minnesota Households: 21,645 Population in Households: 50,042 Average Household Size: 2.312 Housing Total: 23,204 Population in Group Quarters: 219 Occupancy Rate: 93.28% Total Population: 50,261 The Metropolitan Council's Annual Estimates account for housing stock changes since April 1, 2010. These include housing units permitted and other changes. Other changes are due to demolitions, building conversions (units added or lost), city boundary changes (units annexed in or out), and other changes reported by city and township staff. The Council assumes that 85% of multifamily and 95% of single - family units permitted in 2013 were completed and occupiable by April 1, 2014; the remainder are occupiable in the future. Manufactured homes are counted each year from Metropolitan Council surveys of manufactured home park operators and local governments. Other housing (boats, RVs, etc. used as housing) is an estimate from the most recent Census ACS estimates. Each housing type will have a specifically estimated occupancy rate and average household size. Starting with the 2011 -12 cycle, the primary data are the most recent American Community Survey estimates, calculated and adjusted as described in the Council's methodology, available online at http: / /stats.metc. state. mn.us /stats /aboutestimates.aspx Definitions: A household is a group of people (or one person alone) occupying a housing unit. The number of occupied housing units and the number of households are equivalent. Population in Group Quarters (or institutional housing) is counted separately through an annual Metropolitan Council survey. Housing Stock Permitted and Other changes Housing Stock Population in April 1, 2010 built since 2010 since 2010 April 1, 2014 Single- family- detached: 12,861 322 -94 13,089 Townhomes: 1,326 0 0 1,326 Duplex, 3 -, 4 -plex units: 514 4 0 518 Multifamily units: 7,859 412 0 8,271 Manufactured homes: 0 Multifamily units: 8,271 0 Other (boats, RVs, etc. as shelter): 0 11,781 Manufactured homes: 0 • Housing Total: 22,560 2.640 0 23,204 Each housing type will have a specifically estimated occupancy rate and average household size. Starting with the 2011 -12 cycle, the primary data are the most recent American Community Survey estimates, calculated and adjusted as described in the Council's methodology, available online at http: / /stats.metc. state. mn.us /stats /aboutestimates.aspx Definitions: A household is a group of people (or one person alone) occupying a housing unit. The number of occupied housing units and the number of households are equivalent. Population in Group Quarters (or institutional housing) is counted separately through an annual Metropolitan Council survey. Metropolitan Council 5/14/2015 Housing Stock Occupancy Occupied with Persons Per Population in April 1, 2014 Rate 2014 Households Household 2014 Single- family- detached: 13,089 94.16% 12,325 2.770 34,134 Townhomes: 1,326 94.16% 1,249 2.770 - 3,459 Duplex, 3 -, 4 -plex units: 518 88.08% 456 1.464 668 Multifamily units: 8,271 92.07% 7,615 1.547 11,781 Manufactured homes: 0 0.00% 0 2.640 0 Other: 0 Counted only if 0 2.270 0 occupied Housing Total: 23,204 Households: 21,645 In Households: 50,042 In Group Qtrs: 219 • Total Population: 50,261 Metropolitan Council 5/14/2015 Dear Employer, We are excited to announce the 2015 spring Commuter Challenge and Bike to Work Week! These fun Try It campaigns have proven successful in incentivizing drive alone commuters to switch to using sustainable ways of getting to work. Commuter Services would appreciate if you would hang the enclosed posters in your employee break room to help us reach your commuters with the opportunity to win prizes and also so they may contact us for assistance. We offer free resources and services to encourage individuals to carpool, take transit, bike to work and vanpool. We are also happy to create an email or article for any electronic communications you distribute to employees. And we would be delighted to come on site to host a commuter fair at your convenience. Our resources align well with Green or Sustainability - themed events, as well as Benefits and Health fairs. We work with over 850 companies and everyone's participation adds up to meaningful results. Last year alone we: • Held 137 commuter fairs onsite with employers and multi- tenant office buildings • Converted 871 new carpoolers • 561 new transit riders • 558 new bicycle commuters • • Leading to 2,338 Drive alone commuters reporting that they switched to using a sustainable commute mode (three or more days /week) after receiving customized assistance from Commuter Services, resulting in an estimated 35.25 million vehicle miles avoided as a direct result of staff outreach And here is one of Grand Prize Winners from the 2014 Commuter Challenge... Greg Peterson, Carlson $500 Visa Gift Card "I put my bike on the bus bike rack and bus to work in the morning, and then I bike home. Biking is a relaxing way to end the workday and I get my exercise in." Thank you for assisting us in promoting the Commuter Challenge and Bike to Work Week. Please contact us if we can provide additional materials, meet with you to discuss programs such as discounted transit passes or to schedule an event. Sincerely, i Jd-LS1c'/44d{ o-11 Melissa Madison Executive Director • (612) 749 -4494 melissa@494corridor.org Kate Meredith Director of Outreach (612) 750 -4494 kate @494corridor.org 5701 Normandale Read, Suite 322 • Edina, MN 55424 • p 952.848.4947 • F 952.848.4904 • 494corridor.org Heather Branigin • From: J. Gerry Briggs <gbriggs63 @aol.com> Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2015 6:57 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Grandview City Council This is to express support for plans that include private as well as public use of the Grandview property. It would be a great place to live -near restaurants, groceries, hardware, drug store and library. A small public park would also be a good addition to the area. Judging from the weekly Sun Current there is a vocal minority that wants only public use,including a community center. They seem to have organized a weekly writing program which would make it seem to be a big push. This is a note from "the silent majority " to say we don't need nor want to pay for such exclusive public uses. Hang in there! Sincerely -Gerry Briggs 7208 Fleetwood Drive Sent from my iPad • • 0 Heather Branigin From: aecksteinll <aecksteinll @gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2015 2:38 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Attention: City Council and Engineering Hello, To whom ever is reading this message, I hope you're having a good day. My name is Abby Eckstein and I am writing to this team in regards to the proposed improvement of building a noise wall for TH100 from Minnehaha Creek to Vernon Avenue. I wanted to express my comment that I am NOT in favor of this project. I have been an Edina resident for over two years, and in that time frame the noise from the freeway has not be an issue for me. My home is situated far enough from the highway that I do not feel that a wall is necessary, nor does it provide any value for me. On the topic of value, home values in this neighborhood are sitting at great levels, so I dont feel that adding a wall would increase them in a drastic way. In fact, a home across the street from mine was listed and sold within 45 hours! That's telling a story on the health and demand of this location. Also, I am away from home 12+ hours Monday through Friday, as I work full -time and participate in social activities. When I am home, I don't hear anything! I know many of my neighbors work full -time and I am certain they would echo this same opinion. I appreciate the team taking my thoughts and comments into consideration. I look forward to the Edina City Council unanimously voting NO on constructing a noise wall on Tuesday, May 19th. Thank you for reading and I wish you the best. Abby Eckstein 5033 Edinbrook Lane 952.210.9116 Saul on the new Sprint ;Network From my Samsung Galaxy 8*4. • Heather Branigin • From: Stephanie K. Mullaney <stephaniemuIlaney @comcast.net> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 10:22 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: checking to see if email was received Hi, I sent an email with 4 attachments last Friday. I want to ensure that it got included in the Correspondence Packet for the Council. I am concerned because I sent the email to two other people who didn't get all the attachments, or didn't get the email at all. Thank you for your assistance. Stephanie Mullaney Chair, Public Grandview • • 0 Heather Branigin From: Arnold Bigbee <arnieb1 @me.com> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 11:49 AM To: Public Grandview Cc: Edina Mail Subject: My thoughts Stephanie, Thanks for sharing the thoughts of your group. I hope those who attend the work session are intent upon listening to the Council while they do their work. My concern stems from the letter to the editor in last week's Edina Sun Current. That person has very specific thoughts about the current process - and was disrespectful to our public servants - elected, volunteers and staff - in expressing those thoughts. The Grandview item has been a long standing process with lots of public input encouraged. The Council deserves to conduct their public work in a setting that reflects respect for the public process - for everyone. I live in Edinborough and very near Centennial Lakes. The great community spaces in both of these developments would't thrive without the public /private partnership. It is what makes them sustainable. I lived in Rochester for 32 years and saw how successful the public /private partnerships were there. They are well managed and, because both businesses and the public (City /County /State) are also invested, they continue to thrive. • I prefer the public /private partnership direction the Council is pursuing. Arnie Arnie Bigbee amiebl@me.com 612 804 4660 On May 18, 2015, at 10:18 AM, Public Grandview <contactQpublicgrandview.com> wrote: • E E PUBLIC GRANDVIEW I?LEA.S:E. ATTE' ND THESE MEETING`+ Cite Council Working Session Tuesday, May 29 Cbm.mu.nity Room - City Hall ;:oa PM City Council Meetinb June 2., 2015 City Hall 7:00 PM SUPPORT THE CAUSE Endorse he call at i>» 6=J .FULL.OWonPACGBOOK CONSIDERATION of l00% PUBLIC Tomorrow evening, May 19, the Council will be holding a working session on the former public works site (Grandview). Public Grandview urges you to attend the 5:00 PM session in the community room upstairs at City Hall. Seating is tight, but a presence of residents will reflect our concern about the current process and support of a 100% public option. I have been told that the City will consider a 100% public option at this point. If you view the Cit developer's presentation that will be discussed with the Council, you will see that they added a fourth scenario for consideration, with only a civic building and a medical building. Public Grandview has submitted three documents to the Council proposing and supporting a true multi- purpose community center for the former public works site. F4 U 0 • • • • Community Center Proposal >> • Why a Community Center Makes Sense >> • Time to Reflect on the Grandview Process >> This is a pivotal time for this effort! I urge you to visit Spgja__Up 11 the City that we and continue to tell want a 100% public option with a true community center. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Post on Speak Up, Edina! ASAP - before tomorrow noon to express your preferences - I suggest you post to the "OTHER" category. If we have many comments on that post, we can show ongoing support. Spread the word! 2. Attend the Council working session tomorrow evening at 5:00 PM • 3. Plan to attend the June 2 Council meeting. -Email me if you have any questions. SAVE THE DATE Please put June 2, 2015 on your calendar. it is the date that the city COL11-Kil is due to vote on the Grandview development scenarios. This may be subject to change; we will let you know any updates. Thank you. Stephanie Mullaney, Chair Public Grandview PublicGrandview.com Email • Copyright (D 2025 A Public Grandview, All rights reserved. • You are on this list because you expressed interest in the Grand-dew redevelopment process Our muffing address is: A Public Grandview 4429 Brookside Terrace Edina, MN 55436 Add us to your nciclreas book gnsub%r_iJI)e fromthh �l qt update subscriLton pref -maces 0 • • • May 15, zo15 To: Edina City Council Members Scott Neal, Edina City Manager From: Public Grandview RE: Former Public Works Site Dear City Council Members and Scott Neal, I respectfully submit the following documents concerning the development of the former public works site. Please use these documents for discussion in your May ig Grandview working session to consider a s00% public option on the Grandview site. • It's Time to Reflect on the Grandview Development Process • Edina Community Center Proposal A place to gather as a community and increase individual wellness • A True Community Center for Edina Why a community center makes sense on the former public works site As a resident relatively new to the Grandview issue, the public engagement process has been a • frustrating experience. The chagrin I felt as a result of the December 4 meeting was the catalyst for creating Public Grandview. Since December, through detailed research and data compilation, I have uncovered inconsistencies in the Grandview development process. I have also felt that the community is not being heard, a feeling that is shared by many residents. The first document It's Time to Reflect came from a discussion with Mayor Hovland about the project's non - conformance to the Framework. There are critical remarks about the Grandview process in that document. The criticisms are not intended to find fault, rather, to look at the Grandview process accurately, and to motivate process change. Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body; it calls attention to the development of an unhealthy state of things. Winston Churchill He has a right to criticize, who has a heart to help. Abraham Lincoln I truly appreciate the City's time and attention spent on Grandview and hope we can produce an outcome that benefits all residents of Edina. • Thank you. Stephanie Mullaney Chair, Public Grandview www.PublicGrandview.com stephaniemullaney@comcast.net PUBLIC GRANDVIEW • • PUBLIC GRAN DV I E W www. PublicGrandview. com /contact@PublicGrandview.com LET'S STEP BACK ANDTHINK ,r. rt Request to Council Pause the Grandview development process in order to perform a true feasibility study of a community center that is data- driven, based on public input and uses a sound decision making process. Why Pause Now? The current development plans for the former public works site do not reflect the Framework or the majority of resident feedback. There was never a feasibility / programming study performed regarding a community center or 100% public use of the land. Using data gathered from the recent public engagement process, previous public input and comparable community center data, we can determine the wisest use of this rare parcel. Results Repair the development process to consider public input and create a facility that benefits the majority of residents and as a result, begin mending public trust. 2 Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com r PUBLIC GRANDVIEW Examine the Framework Use the Data Create a Plan Do development scenarios comply? Surveys, Meeting Data, Social Media Involve City commission(s) The Council positions consistent- ly call out the Framework and the 52 residents that were involved in the development of the Frame- work. Is the City being true to the framework? Have key implemen- tations been performed? Should the work of the 52 residents trump data from almost 2000 residents? The majority of residents were not aware of the Grandview pro- cess until the widely publicized meeting on December 4. Since that time, there is no evi- dence that the data used in the public meetings and Speak Up! Edina have been used to form the development scenarios produced by the developer. Using the data in this document, involve the Edina Park Board in this process. They are currently developing a strategic plan and a community building should be part of their domain. Examine the 2014 community center proposal submitted by Citizens for a Better Grandview and glean data and suggestions from that plan. http: / /bit.ly /1 Qkg9ts HOW THE GRANDVIEW PROCESS AFFECTS PUBLIC OPINION OF THE CITY COUNCIL After receiving over $100,000 of tax- payer money to create a Small Area Plan, the Grandview development process did not produce such a plan. In a process spanning over five years, there has been no community pro- gramming study. Asking for the public's input and ignoring it fuels public cynicism and anger. Public meetings did not invite attendee questions, the data has not been used and has been misrepresented by city staff. By stepping back and considering the public feedback data, the Council has an opportunity to redeem the Grandview process and rebuild credibility amongst Edina residents/ voters. Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site 3 0 • 0 � PUBLIC GRANDVIEW • • www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandView.com THE FRAMEWORK - SUMMARY Not a true small area plan The Grandview small area planning process resulted in the Framework document because it did not qualify as a true small area plan. Since its approval in 2012, key implementations of the Framework have not been initiated or completed. Summary Key elements of a true small area plan have yet to be completed. This has resulted in a haphazard development process based on preferences of the development team leaders, Council members and City staff as opposed to public data gathered by the City. No Small Area Plan Created In 2010, the City received a Livable Communities Demonstration Grant (LDCA) for $100,000 to create a Small Area Plan. The resulting document, the Framework, was not compliant with the LCDA requirements because it did not contain the elements listed to the right. 4 Market Analysis Community Needs Analysis Transportation Analysis and Plan Redevelopment Phasing Plan Public Participation Plan Financial Analysis of Redevelopment Plan Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site PUBLIC � GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact @PublicGrandview.com FRAMEWORK - ANALYSIS: IMPLEMENTATION There is a consistent lack of completion of implementation steps in the Framework • • A feasbility study that examines the costs and resources available Implementation to bear those costs... page 4 "The process to be pursued An examination of the height and density necessary to make the should, as in past efforts vision financially feasible while ensuring that it results in the ... leading to the framework, neighborhood character that is essential to the Framework be defined by the citizen page 4 volunteers.' A community building /public green programming work should work to determine appropriate program and uses In 2014, despite a 6 -2 page 14 recommendation by the CAT III to hire an Create a more bike and pedestrian - friendly environment by apply- ing Complete Streets and Living Streets principles to Vernon, Eden independent consultant, and the local street network.... the Council elected to move In the short term, there is an opportunity to begin implementing forward with a private streetscape, bike and pedestrian improvements developer. pages 34 & 35 The top level (deck) of this structure is intended to serve as the This decision by the Council GrandView Green, the major public realm amenity in the district. diminished the value of public page 38 involvement It signaled that, Establish an Implementation Steering Committee using citizen although public input was volunteers to guide the effort, including providing direction for requested the development key remaining areas of the framework.... page 49 process is not a democratic _ An overriding objective of the GrandView District planning process process and public input is not is to utilize local citizens as experts in defining directions for an valued because it does not area .... align with council preferences. pa3e 49 j ...it is logical that the process of planning using local citizens to guide the process should continue. The process to be pursued should, as in past efforts leading to the framework, be defined by the citizen volunteers. page 49 Implementation - Major Recommendations None of the implementations for <1 year or 1 -5 years have been performed, with the exception of approving the Framework. page 51 Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site 5 • • � PUBLIC GRANDVIEW :7 • www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com THE FRAMEWORK- ANALYSIS: DESIGN The current development process does not comply with the Framework Public Realm GrandVlew Commons: GtandView Commout inciades GrandView Crossing, GrandView Green, and a new community /dsvc building. Design 'The districtserves primardyas a neighborhood (rather than a regional) center." "Neighborhood feel," 'pedestrian friendly,' and "safe and connected "describe the desired character for the district. Framework -page 13 Comparison of Interior Square Footage (approx) Framework, pg 19 173,000 CBG Proposal * 113,000 Scenario 1 279,000 Scenario 2 400,000 Scenario 3 310,000 ...the public works site pro videsa unique andsingular opportunity to create major newpublicrealm amenity that will add interest to the area foralistakeholders, value to real estate and provide a signature gathering place in the heart of the district.. Framework - page 28 A central commons on the Public Works site with indoor and outdoor public space page 3 Civic building and green space is listed as one of three key civic centers. page 14 New central green space - Grandview Green page 14 Community / Civic Space 50,000 square feet Public Green space 28,000 square feet page 19 The result should be a greater sense of green throughout the district. page 26 Create a prominent public realm of connected parks, green space, paths, plazas, and private open space — a legible green framework... page 26 Density of scenarios from April 22 open house reflect a much denser development than is called for in the Framework (left) Jennifer Janovy letter submitted to the Council 6 Grandview Development on the Former Public Works site PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.Publ!cGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com FRAMEWORK - ANALYSIS: FUNCTION A lack of follow through on the Framework studies has created a "ready, shoot, aim" process, Function Address needs of underserved populations (teens, singles, seniors, etc.) page 14 Establish a community commons in a multi- Acknowledge "no net loss;'yet aggressively seek new purpose facility fora wide public space page 26 audience (e.g. whole body, whole life, health and Folks hearing about this for the first time should know wellness) and as a focal that there has been extensive public engagement regarding the future of the Grandview District in point and central gathering general and the old public works site in particular. place..... I encourage anyone engaging in the process to spend some time reviewing the work that has been Framework- page 14 accomplished to date. Grandview Community Commons Diagram What /Who Populates the Commons? Soda[ Interaction Banquet and Reception ='lte�i%itncu4�toi` History/ Interpretive PerrorminyandylsualAits , Meetings As a city council member,l'll be looking to ensure that whatever plan we ultimately pursue is true to the concepts embodied in the Framework that so many Edina residents worked so hard to create. Kevin Staunton in Next Door post GRANDVIEW COMMONS In the current development process, where is the vision ofa newpublic realm amenity that will provide a signature gathering place in the heart of the district? In addition to social interaction, none of the public functions listed to the left have been studied or vetted. The current direction of an arts center appears to based on Council preferences, and not driven by public opinion. Chart from Framework- page 28 Grandview Development on the Former Pubiic Works Site 7 • i PUBLIC GRA N D V I E W www.Publ!cGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com PUBLIC FEEDBACK DATA The public engagement data has not been used in decision making and has been misrepresented. City Surveys Grandview Resident Survey February 2014 Community Needs Assessment November 2014 Highligts ofthese surveys can be found on Public Grandview's Consolidation of Findings: httpJ /www.publicgrandview.com/ resources /summary - public -input Prior Public Input This document will focus on providing public input data from the date of the fi rst public meeting, December 4, 2014 to the present. Previous public input data can be found on the Public Grandiew website on the • Consolidation of Findings page: http: / /www.publicgrandview.coin /resources /summary - public -input Current Public The City's current public engagement process began in December 2014 and Engagement Process includes the following elements: Meeting / Media Data Report December-4 Meeting Summary and Image Survey Community Meeting January 15 Meeting Summary and Image Survey High School Meeting Speak Up, Edina! Phase I None, except by Public Grandview March 11 Slideshow on the website showing the three scenarios. Community Meeting Public comment sheets were posted, with no summary. Speak Up, Edina! Phase II None, except by Public Grandview April 22 Meeting Data not available in time for this document Speak Up, Edina! Phase III Ongoing PUBLIC FEEDBACK -i- • 8 Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site PUBLIC � GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@Publ!cGrandview.com Mmunily/Rec �. -Food /Retail /Cafe i -Geet e31,t�bi�: I Pubiic Space /Gathe�i�g Space /platalSgd e -,� -�~�� _ "'`� ¶�� I�",�� ArtlCultural-CanterlTheater Iflc 3 - ;� Greer�-Space December 4, 2014 December 4 meeting summary page 10 states: "A preference for mid - low density, mixed use development on the site" There is no data in the report to support that statement. Note the size of multi -mixed use on the word cloud, above. General Assessment from the Summary Report: "Like the previous exercises, it was highly expressed the desire for the site to incorporate communityspace, with community1rec- center (27596 ofparticipantssupport). This was the most frequent response, followed by an art/cu/tural - center or theater space (2096). Participants also expressed that the site has potential to become an indoor - meeting orgathering Space (10.896)...." Source: http: / /bit.ly /lzy9VMD PUBLIC FEEDBACK -2- Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site EXPLORATION SESSION - PUBLIC MEETING The City held its first widely - publicized community meeting to gather resident Input as to "what could be built here ?" The meeting was very tightly controlled, with little opportunity for residents to ask questions. The lack of dialogue led to frustration by many members of the audience. The primary response for the question regarding opportunities for the site was a Community/ Recreation Center, followed by Public Space, Gathering Space and Plaza /Square. Third response was Art/Cultural - Center/Theater. Total number of responses: 422 Number of responses that were congruent 249 59% with public use Number of responses that named items such as community 195 46% center, a public gathering space, park or that are congruent with a multi - purpose community center Number of responses that included private use or mist 36 1 % (non likely uses such as zoo, gun range, lake, factory) Number of responses asking for retail or restaurant 22 5% Number of responses that included housing 7 2% (includes affordable housing, senior housing) Areas of Interest — these were included in the above numbers but stand out with respect to the audience's concern / preferences: Transportation /Parking: 21 Outdoor element: 13 Green /Architectural concerns: 16 Source: Consolidation of Findings, Public Grandview http: / /bit.ly /l DH- QDWZ 1r 1J u lu � PUBLIC GRANDVIEW 0 0 www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com c 0 Sustainable v Skate -park Park 1 i Communal -space Fkub Performance - spaced a, i ue pors /recreatonwfi I -~i S ^ � C(3CTt nitylC'r1tCrE Green .'t =' it iir,'Irt Cafe . , R e tau Mnt�� `. L— t "ParkingRetail January 15, 2015 EXPLORATION SESSION - EDINA HIGH SCHOOL General Assessment: Similarly to the adult/mixed- age participants, the student participants expressed the desire for this site to include a community focus, with community/rec- center component (24.445 of participants support). The student participants had more focus on sports and recreation (11.145) and also expressed the desire foran ice rink (13.396)... Page 10 Similar to the Decembersession, it appears that the student participants also prefer the pictures that includeda bigger portion ofgreen space, with open plazas and buildings that are set back from the road. Source: Confluence Consolidation of Findings: http: / /bit.ly /1MMit7Kj PUBLIC FEEDBACK -3- 10 The Public Space category was overall most preferred as a whole category. The students seemed to prefer public spaces with more green space. Page 3 of Confluence Consolidation of Findings The highest number of responses for the `opportunities" question was Cafe /Restaurant (33) and Community Center (22). Number of students participating: Total number of responses: .E 308 Number of responses that were congruent 164 53% with public use Number of responses that named items such as community 246 80% center, a public gathering space, park or that are congruent with a multi - purpose community center Number of responses asking for retail or restaurant 24 18% Number of responses that included private, mixed use 24 8% Number of responses that included housing of some type 8 3% Number of responses with unlikely outcome 10 3% (i.e. gun range, go-carts, lake, zoo) NOTE:The highest number of responses were Cafe /Restaurant (33) and Com- munity Center (22). Source: Consolidation of Findings, Public Grandview http: /Ibit.ly /1 DHQDWZ Grandview Developmenton the Former Public Works Site PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com 14A' \ley k; Tt LAL �• a4a ,�� ► SHARE your feedback] ► POST your ideas! ► JOIN the discussion! January/ February 2015 QUOTES FROM RESIDENTS Firs4 Edina needs a state of the art communitycenter - including the performing arts and fitness/ wellness components The fitness / wellness components should include a walking track, basketball & racquetball courts, fitness equipmentand possiblya pool. It could even include some commercial space fora coffee shop & restaurant. publicpropertyis forpublic use and enjo yment. l think the combined Community Center — fitness, Art Center, etc. —is something that Edina is missing that neighboring communities have. Source: http: / /bit.ly /1 JBtuMS PUBLIC FEEDBACK -4- IDEAS FOR REUSE & PUBLIC ELEMENTS IDEAS FOR REUSE 18 � Total number of responses: 25 Number endorsing community center: 9 36% Number endorsing retaining public land: 11 44% i Number concerned about traffic / transportation 6 24% Number for mixed use: 2 8% Number against community center: 2 8% PUBLIC ELEMENTS Total number of responses 19 Number endorsing community center: 14 74% Number endorsing retaining public land: 4 21% Number concerned about traffic/ transportation 3 16% Number for mixed use: 1 5% Data study done through February 13, 2015 * Source: Consolidation of Findings, Public Grandview http: / /bit.ly /1 DliQDWZ is Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site 11 � PUBLIC GRANDVIEW � k Shown originally on the website www.Publ!cGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com True aspect ratio MISLEADING COMMUNICATION FROM THE CITY March 11, 2015 DISCOVERY SESSION - PUBLIC MEETING No summary report was Three scenarios were presented to the public. Attendees completed by the City on the were given three dots to vote with. At the end of the March 11 meeting. Like the presentation, attendees were told how to vote on the December 4 meeting, this was scenario boards, and if they didn't like ANY of the scenarios, tightly controlled and did not to put the dots in their pockets and "walk home." welcome questions. Many • attendees were visibily Some attendees began to leave immediately. In order to frustrated. provide a voice for "none of the above" vote to count, Public Grandview and Citizens for a Better Grandview collected dots City misrepresentations and from residents who did not like any three of the scenarios. errors after the March 11 meeting increased public At the end of the night, the green dot data showed: frustration by misrepresenting Central Civic Cascade 13 public feedback, errors in site representation and sending the South Civic Center 14 public to a web page that had not been updated. North Tower 26 The Disco very Session "was None of the above 130 formatted to provide ample opportunity forpublic input .. Total votes for one of the three scenarios: 53 A4anyaudience questions Total votes for 'none of the above' 130 were answered during the presentation. 'NONE OF THE ABOVE' RECEIVED ALMOST 2.5 TIMES THE Scott Neal AMOUNTTHAN ALL SCENARIOS COMBINED. Friday Report - March 20, 2015 Some dots were left on community center boards, a small The postcard from the City was sample, butshows preference forfitness /wellness delivered to residents before the website was updated. Multigenerational Communnity Center 3 Once the website was updated, Arts and Culture 4 it had a broken link for the Speak Fitness/Wellness 6 Up, Edina! page, • PUBLIC FEEDBACK -5- 12 Grandview Development on the Former Public Works site is • • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact @PublicGrandview.com FEEDBACK FROM MARCH 11 ATTENDEES City Did Not Provide DISCOVERY SESSION - PUBLIC INPUT Data Analysis Public Grandview analyzed the data from the forms with the following results. Comments are varied, the data is analyzed No data analysis was done with to show trends. the feedback forms. They were available on the website, but no NORTH CIVIC SPACE summary was presented to the Total comments analyzed 53 public or to the Council. Source: http: / /bit.ly /1 Ebtbke Liked this scenario for large civic space 12 23% Too tall 10 19% The League of Women Voters Number of comments about public use 10 19% were told in their February Number wanting housing 2 4% meeting with Bill Neuendorfthat Number wanting commercial 2 4% the data the City is gathering is Like density 1 2% "not quantifiable" Analyzing the data may not result 1009b Comments about transportation, misc. 3 6% scientifically -valid outcomes, but PUBLIC USE AND CIVIC SPACE PREFERENCES: 22 42% trends andgeneralpreferences USES OTHERTHAN PUBLIC 5 9% are easy to spot when numbers are weightedin one aspect. SOUTH CIVIC CORNER Total comments analyzed 5 Not enough civic space 2 40% MISC COMMENTS Misc. comments 3 60% General and misc. comments CENTRAL CIVIC CASCADE were analyzed. Total comments analyzed 5 Total comments: 33 Numbers in favor of public space/comm ctr 3 60% Others mentioned use rooftop and too massive 2 40% Bad process or outcome: 18 Public use: 6 OTHER COMMENTS Total comments analyzed 13 Transportation or Community Center / Public Use 7 54% parking concerns: 7 Who is paying for this / need better process 4 31% Want commercial 1 8% Mixed use: z Don't have civic compete with private (i.e. fitness) 1 8% 55% USE OF COMMUNITY SPACE Total comments analyzed 24 18 / 33 comments reflected Bad process or outcome 7 30% that the process was flawed Community/ public use 6 25% and /or the outcomes Want arts /culture 5 21% were unacceptable and Want fitness 3 13% uninspired. Misc. comments 3 13% PUBLIC FEEDBACK -6- Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site 13 is • • � PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @Pub!icGrandviewcom A, � "- -, , 0 11 'd Ina cr O :.,..r • ,� „,mss• ► SHHRE your feedback! i, POST your ideas! ► JOIN the discussion! March 2015 QUOTES FROM RESIDENTS /agree, l do not think that we needmore commericia /areas We need a p /ace to be and grow with our families and our neighbors, espedallyin winter time. • This is a wonderful opportunity fora community centerin Edina that would serve all ofour residents is All the thoughtful comments from the majority ofpeople who have asked forspecificpublic uses have been ignored. We have spent the money on the golfers for the dome and the hockeyfolks for the ice center, now letsgive something to the entire community. Please listen to your voters and notyourpaid consultants The preliminary draft of Edina Parks & Recreation Master Plan shows Edina in the bottom tier for community and recreation centers PUBLIC FEEDBACK -7- 14 RESPONSE TO MARCH 11 SCENARIOS SOUTH CIVIC CENTER Total number of responses: 4 What does civic mean? What does public mean? 2 This is a "nothing space" (with respect to civic) 1 Where is affordable housing? No innovation, no walkability, connectivity, buildings built to the street 1 CENTRAL CIVIC CASCADE Total number of responses: 2 Not enough civic space for community center, you don't say what civic is 1 City is asking developer to design community space, 5 year process vs a 6 month process in Vancouver, no site analysis. Step back from process 1 NORTH CIVICTOWER Total number of responses: 3 Tall building, is it within Comp. Plan? 1 All comments ignored. Trying to avoid folks that don't want taxes raised. C+ work at best. 1 Does not fall within Comprehensive Plan. Designer did not know what guidelines were. 1 PUBLIC USES Total number of responses: 4 Number for community center 4 Data study done through March 31, 2015 Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site www.PublicGrandview.com /contactpPublicGranclView.com E� April 22, 2015 t No summary report was completed by the City for the April 22 meeting. The open house" format became a presentation meeting. Like previous meetings, it was a one - way presentation with little room for dialogue. PRELIMINARY EXCERPTS TOO DENSE.!i How aboutsome grass and flowers? Sad to lose so much public space. A community center with residential over it would have worked. City council has not listened to the public on this PUBLIC � GRANDVIEW t OPEN HOUSE - PUBLIC MEETING The data on the public feedback sheets was not made available on the website when the April 22 information was posted. Public Grandview requested the data twice, but did not get it until it was too late to analylze and tabulate for inclusion in this document. Too massive. Don't like idea of 10 -12 stories Too congested. We7llook like the Westin on this side of Edina! Would prefer larger public use ofsite - less private development. A!l exceed any reasonable densities for this three acre site. PUBLIC FEEDBACK -8- Great idea for art and community center... please no more apartments or office space. No hotel, please. Affordable housing - too manypeople who workin Edina can't afford to live here. 12 stories too high. l would like to see some recreation /health /sports facilities Green space, please. Art center is not needed as others locally have not been successful. Public landshouldstay in public hands! Way too commercial and residential, too little civic/ community. Too dense. lts massive and ugly. Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site 15 n • � PUBLIC GRANDVIEW • • HOW DID WE GET HERE? www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com �entrational 1'rogranlming Perform og Arts Edina Center for Arts and Community Where is the data to support this direction? Where is the data that supports the arts and culture direction? City surveys don't reflect this preference. What percentage of the community will this center serve? We have already invested a large amount of money in the community to serve golfers and hockey players. It's time for the general public to benefit. Where is the market analysis? There has been no vetting of the arts and culture concept, nor market analysis. Art centers tend to lose money. Many communities combine arts facilities with recreation facilities to offset the art cen- ters' losses. Council believes that a recreation center is not needed because there is "no market failure" Comparable cities have the same density of private clubs and still glean a profit from their recreation centers. 16 Based on individual Council preferences The April 7 city council Grandview discussion was disconcerting to hear. Prior to Council comments, no public data was presented to the Council. Individual Council statements reflected personal preferences. There were no questions to Mr. Neuendorf regarding what public feedback reflected. Multi - generational gathering space? The proposed civic center does nothing to unite the generations. Teens and seniors have been selected as the target markets. How about fami- lies with young children and everyone else? This concept segments and segretates the pop- ulation, and most importantly, is not supported by facts or the process. Grandview Development on the former Public Works site PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com PUBLIC OPINION Frustration and skepticism fueled by Grandview process Where does the public feedback data go? No public/city dialogue The community engagement process is seen as In each public meeting, there is very disingenuous. Data is collected, but not limited time provided for actual dialogue presented to the Council. The Council has not between the City and residents. asked for the data. See http.//bit.1y/IzLf6ih Framework is cited, but not followed Misrepresentations of meetings, etc. The Framework is consistently referenced Data from surveys, meetings and resident to support the current development process. input is not provided to the Council; The development scenarios bear no sweeping statements by City staff do not resemblance to the Framework. reflect the actual data. Informal survey on Next Door forum Pentagon ParkTIF fuels distrust Do you think the City of Edina In handing the redevelopment of the Grandview alt. oorr e4T The recent attention related to the G No. I do not approve 67% Pentagon ParkTIF has citizens wary of ves.I approve _,.. City processes and the TIF concept in I have no opinion either way o general. 1 would like more Information ,., Using a TIF for the former public works site will likely add fuel to the perception that the Council favors developers over its Shand with Goli Te,re<a HeigH.. 22 nd4hborh —& in General residents. 67% of respondents do not approve of the City's handling of the Grandview process. Five years versus nine months- Grandview versus Wooddale/ValleyView (WW) The Wooddale Valley View small area plan presentation at the April 7 city council meeting provided an opportunity to compare the two processes. WW was a nine month process that resulted in a true Small Area Plan. Grandview's five year development process did not result in a Small Area Plan and has not fulfilled many of its visions and goals. Grandview Development on the Former Public Works Site 17 0, 1 • • • 1] Edina Community Center A place to gather as a community and increase individual wellness A whole community, whole person center for Edina. 100% PUBLIC PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com A MULTI - PURPOSE COMMUNITY CENTER Serve the entire community through wellness, arts and a community gathering area. Framework's Vision rid Establish a community commons as a multi-pur- pose facility for a wide audience (e.g., whole body, whole life, health and wellness) and as a focal point and central gathering space.... Framework, page 14 A Single Destination 4 A As a single destination, the Community Center will become the community "Living room "that promotes civic pride and enhances the quality of life for all residents... Hillsboro Oregon Community Center summary document THE COMMUNITY'S LIVING ROOM fifi A community center is the heart of the community. It is a public place, one we all built, where we directly feel the city's commitment to our well- being. It is the place you go for personal enrichment, and discover you are part of an active and welcoming community... Valerie Otani, Hillsboro, Oregon resident about their new community center d d The Community Center will become the gathering place for citizens of all ages and abilities: a place to learn, play, create, grow, laugh, experience and just hang out with friends. Hillsboro document 2 Edina Community Center Proposal 0 • • • • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com COMMUNITY CENTER CONCEPT A facility that can be used by all residents. Community Spaces Arts and Culture Activity Spaces Community spaces are the heart of the community center including multi- purpose room(s), informal gathering spaces, study spaces, classes, special events /parties. Supporting Spaces These spaces are required to support the community center- the reception area, storage spaces, mechanical rooms and other operational spaces. Although the childcare space is called out in the fitenss area - childcare is available for all of the community center uses, enabling young families to participate in all of the center's offerings. Edina Community Center Proposal Arts and culture space includes the visual arts as well as the performing arts. The community performance space could also be used for other community events. Restaurant The community centerwould host a restaurant, similar to Tin Fish at Braemar. It would be preferable to use a restaurant thatwill attract teens and young residents, but is still healthy and appealing to other generations. Activity spaces would promote health and wellness. Included in activity spaces would be group fitness studio, a walkingfjogging track, weight room, lap pool and recreational pool and a gymnaisum. Outdoor Spaces Create a prominent green space that acts as a community commons and could include uses such as: sculpture garden, outdoor ampitheatre and /or ice rink in winter, in addition, use / reserve outdoor space for transit and parking. 3 PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact @PublicGrandview.com MULTI - GENERATIONAL GATHERING SPACES Places to gather, to learn, to work and to hold special events A place for everyone. For seniors, teens, families and singles. A community center would provide a place to meet, to work together and to play together. Spae `. Cost Casual activities lounge area 1,200 SF 205.00 $ 246,000 Teen area and multi - generational @ 1000 SF 2,000 SF 205.00 $ 410,000 Game room 1,000 SF 215.00 $ 215,000 Community Room - flexible space 3,000 SF 230.00 $ 690,000 Multi- purpose classroom - flexible space 1,000 SF 230.00 $ 230,000 Community/ caterer kitchen 800 SF 355.00 $ 284,000 Special events / party room 700 SF 255.00 $ 178,500 Meeting room / conference room 600 SF 205.00 $ 123,000 Two unisex restrooms 600 SF 305.00 $183,000 Classroom and events room storage Workroom and general storage TOTAL GATHERING SQUARE FOOTAGE; 180 SF 165.00 $ 30,000 350 SF 204.00 $ 71,400 11,430 SF $ 2,660,600 Edina Community Center Proposal • �11 0 • www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com WELLNESS / ACTIVITY CENTER Create an activity center that benefits all residents of Edina J Space Gymnasium Walking /jogging track 2 multipurpose group exercise PUBLIC GRANDVIEW Provide a wellness and activity center that attracts all ages. Square footage Cost per SF Cost 6,000 $195.00 $1,170,000 81000 $225.00 $1,800,000 4,400 $210.00 $924,000 I Cardio / weight room 6,000 $225.00 $1,350,000 Fitness studio 1,000 $215.00 $215,000 Wellness center/ fitness assessment 1,000 $225.00 $225,000 Climbing structure 1,600 $210.00 $336,000 Childcare (shared by all center uses) 1,000 $200.00 $200,000 Gym storage 300 $154.00 $46,200 Multi- purpose, cardio /weight and childcare storage 600 $165.00 $99,000 TOTAL ACTIVITIES SQUARE FEET 29,900 $6,365,200 Edina Community Center Proposal 5 PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact @PublicGrandview.com AQUATIC CENTER A family4riendly pool and lap pool I Aquatic center that is open 70 r year around. Space aaa --r-W r Square footage Cost per SF Cost Recreational pool 6,000 $345.00 $2,070,000 Lap pool 7,500 $345.00 $2,587,500 Pool mechanicals and aquatics storage 1,600 $189.00 $302,400 Thermo /hydrotherapy 250 $500.00 $125,000 Pool sanitation storage 140 $145.00 $20,300 First aid office 80 $ 214.00 $17,120 Pool construction $1,260,000 Recreational pool equipment $ 885,000 TOTAL AQUATICS SQUARE FOOTAGE: 15,5, $7,267,320 ii I II 6 Edina Community Center Proposal 0 is • www.PubllcGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com PERFORMING ARTS Create a performing arts space PUBLIC GRANDVIEW A performance space that can be utilized in multiple ways. Space Square footage Cost per SF Cost Community performance room (flexible/ 3,500 movable seating) Two dressing rooms @300 SF 600 Rehearsal rooms (2@ 1200 SF) 2,400 Storage 800 TOTAL PERFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE: 7,500 $300.00 $875,000 $200.00 $120,000 $210.00 $504,000 $165.00 $132,000 The performing arts and visual arts can share spaces such as restrooms, front of house (lobby). Edina Community Center Proposal VA PUBLIC GRANDVIEW EDINA ARTS CENTER Create a new home for the Edina Art Center www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com VISUAL ARTS Based on Scenario A in the Schuler Shook document. Used NET square footage. Space Gallery Square footage 1700 700 Cost per SF $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 Cost $340,000 $140,000 $260,000 $160,000 $80,000 $60,000 $700,000 $440,000 $200,000 $200,000 $80,000 $200,000 $ 200,000 $ 50,000 Large Studios Small Studios Specialized Labs Administration Offices Gift Shop Pottery /Ceramics Studio Metal Arts 1300 800 400 300 3500 2200 Glass Photography/ Jewelry Conference Room Rental Studio Space Storage Receiving TOTAL ART CENTER 5UARE,.Qr 1000 1000 400 10001 1000 ! 250 8 Edina Community Center Proposal • • • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com GENERAL SPACES Miscellaneous spaces required to run a community center � s t Space Square footage Cost per SF Cost Lobby 1200 $230.00 $276,000 Reception bay /access 300 $205.00 $61,500 Vending area 150 $255.00 $38,250 Locker room - women 1,700 $255.00 $433,500 Locker room - men 1,500 $255.00 $382,500 Lockerroom - family 300 $230.00 $69,000 4 offices - manager and coordinators 480 $189.00 $90,720 3 staff offices 240 $194.00 $46,560 Maintenance / receiving offices 500 $168.00 $84,000 Supporting spaces / storage 480 $180.00 $86,400 Edina Community Center Proposal 9 PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.Publ!cGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com OPERATIONAL SPACES Mechanical, circulation, etc. Space Square footage Cost per SF Cost • Pool circulation 4201 $205.00 $861,246 Building circulation 20,391 $185.00 $ 3,772,335 TOTAL OPERATIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: 20,508 $ 3,855,320 0 Edina Community Center Proposal 0 0 PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com RESTAURANT A private food provider that is healthy and appealing to all ages. Space Restaurant space TOTAL RESTAURANT SQUARE FOOTAGE: Square footage Cost per SF Cost 1,500 $355.00 $ 532,500 1,500 $ 532,500 NOTE: ESTIMATED SIZE AND COST PER SQUARE FOOT. COST PER SQUARE FOOT WAS ARRIVED AT USING COST PER SQUARE FOOT OF KITCHEN AREA. Edina Community Center Proposal m PUBLIC i GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com COMMUNITY CENTERTOTALS ESTIMATED square footage and costs. Subject to change upon further study. INDOOR SPACE Space Square footage Cost Gathering spaces 11,430 $ 2,660,600 Activity spaces 29,900 $ 6,365,200 Aquatics space 15,570 $ 7,267,320 Performing space 7,500 $ 1,631,000 Art center 15,500 $ 3,110,000 General space 6,850 $1,568,430 Operations 20,508 $ 3,855,320 Restaurant 1500 $ 532,500 TOTAL 108,758 $26,990,370 OUTDOOR SPACE Space Cost Green space estimate $ 4,000,000 Parking - 340 spaces $20,000 per space $ 6,800,000 TOTAL $10,800,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 37,790,370 Thanks to Opsis Architecture for use of their photographs, graphics and estimated square footage costs. 12 Edina Community Center Proposal C • 0 Community Center for WHY community center makes sense on the former public works site A plan for the community, not for the developers PUBLIC i GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact @PublicGrandview.com A MULTI - PURPOSE COMMUNITY CENTER Serve the entire community through wellness, arts and a community gathering area. Ak Framework's Vision A Single Destination As a single destination, the Community Center will become the community "living room "that promotes civic pride and enhances the quality of life for all residents... Hillsboro Oregon Community Center summary document } r i 4 Establish a community commons as a multi- purpose facility for a wide audience (e.g., whole body, whole life, health and wellness) and as a focal point and central gathering space.... Framework, page 14 THE COMMUNITY'S LIVING ROOM A community center is the heart of the community. It is a public place, one we all built, where we directly feel the city's commitment to our well- being. It is the place you go for personal enrichment, and discover you are part of an active and welcoming community... Valerie Otani, Hillsboro, Oregon resident about their new community center The Community Center will become the gathering place for citizens of all ages and abilities: a place to learn, play, create, grow, laugh, experience and just hang out with friends. Hillsboro document 2 Edina community Center Proposal • • • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com HONORING PUBLIC FEEDBACK Give Edina citizens what they have repeatedly requested via public feedback mechanisms Value Statements II 2014 City of Emna �m ,w e 1: b. 50 � Grandview Resident Survey February 2014 - Representative sample of 400 Edina residents 93% sense of community important 55% need more community spaces 68% need more recreational opportunities Edina Community Center Proposal Community Needs Assessment Survey November 2014- Representative sample of 1222 Edina residents 73% supportive of an indoor community space ..� A� �. 58% want walking and jogging track w 33-34% FOR EACH: exercise facility for >50 year olds; aerobia, fitness/ dance space; weight room 4 Pa�mptllldcrgrnuod .,, �, f oodlRctaillCa(� ilunity ffit"Cente Public Engagement December 2014 - Present K 86% of public responses at Dec.4 meeting congruent with this community center proposal 80% of EHS responses on 1 -15 are congruent with this community center proposal 74% support a community center as a public element on Speak Up, Edina! 3 PUBLI GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE A community building that serves a portion of the public sandwiched between dense private development DEVELOPER SCENARIO #2 Community Building 60,000 SF Public development cost up to $38M Programming of community building • Determined by council member preferences; decisions not based on data Community input ignored • Market analysis /feasibility, if completed, has not been shared with the public • The process for determining programming of the community center as specified in the Development Framework has not been followed • Facility designed for use by a narrow segment of residents • Visual and performing arts facilities consistently operate at a loss Density • Civic space sandwiched between high density private development • Office / residential buildings up to 12 stories - does not conform to Comprehensive Plan Privatization of public land • Driven by developers- motivated by profit • How does the "private development help pay for the public ?" (see page 6) • Privatization of public land not supported by Edina residents: 66% say public land should be for public purposes only 4 Edina Community Center Proposal J 0 • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.Publ!cGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com 100% PUBLIC USE OF THE SITE A true community center used by all residents with green space and preservation of public land PUBLIC GRANDVIEW'S VISION Community Center 108,000 SF Public development cost estimate $38M Programming of community building • Determined by citizen feedback and surveys, using a consultant experienced in public spaces • Used by all residents of Edina, not a narrow segment of the population • • Provides gathering spaces for all generations - provides a new, integrated space for seniors and singles, and gives school -aged families and teens a place to gather • Produces a combination of uses that support and complement each other • Private fitness clubs do not build community and are run for profit • Conforms with the Framework - • "a unique and singular opportunity to create a major new public realm amenity... and provide a signature gathering place in the heart of the District." • conforms with the conceptofa neighborhood center -nota dense commercial center Green space: a place to relax and play • Conforms with the Framework and within Comprehensive Plan parameters • Answers public feedback for an outdoor gathering space Preservation of public land • Driven by residents, motivated by building community in the present and for the future Edina Community Center Proposal s PUBLIC GRANDVIEW TIF - WHO WINS? Using TIF for private development -who really benefits? TAX IN REMENT FINAN ING01 Where does the money go ?? www.PublicGrandview.com / contact@PublicGrandview.com Edina residents have recently been hearing about Tax Increment Financing (TIF). The Pentagon Park issue surrounding TIF has become public, and TIF appears to be a vehicle the city wants to use for Grandview. Who wins with TIF? How do the residents of Edina benefit from using TIF at Grandview? What isTIF? TIF uses the increased property taxes that a new real estate development generates to finance the costs of development. It is used to incentivize development in blighted areas and to finance public infrastructure related to development. The length of TIF in the Grandview situation would likely be 26 years. How does TIF relate to the Grandview district? The city consistently has said that private development at Grandview will help to pay for public improvements. Due to the blighted nature of the site, the creation ofanew TIF Redevelopment District is envisioned to help fund public improvements and infrastructure in and around the site, as well as other eligible costs identified in state law. ' April city council meeting: li tp: //bit.ly /1 FaEph What can TIF pay for? Streets and sidewalks Infrastructure (sewer, water, etc) Parking Who is affected byTIF? What can't TIF pay for? Community buildings Arts/ Culture buildings Commons area / parks • Taxable entities - these include the city, the county, the public school system and other entities such as the watershed district, etc The developer benefits - the amount of money the developer has to pay to build roads and infrastructure is reduced by the taxpayer dollars that go into the TIF district and used for project costs. City taxpayers are affected -taxes that would normally be put in the general fund to finance public safety, street maintenance and other public services are instead collected by the TIF district for up to 26 years. Edina Community Center Proposal • • PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com - - -- So, how does TIF work? Let's use Grandview as an example: 1. Assess the site's CURRENT value (let's say $4M) 2. Determine net tax capacity - estimated FUTURE value (let's say $70M) 3. For the period of TIF there are two tax streams: a.Tax Stream 1 -the district taxable entities receive their usual taxes from the property based on the CURRENT assessed value b.Tax Stream 2 - additional tax money generated after the development takes place and the property values are higher. These taxes are collected by the-nF district and are not put in the general fund, which pays for city services. The real value of the taxes is not realized by the City for the length of TIF - i.e. 26 years. 0 Source: httpJ /bit.ly /1 HjBMsn How will Edina taxpayers benefit from a TIF district for Grandview? In the private/ public scenario on the next page, Edina residents get about 340 parking spaces and infrastructure that would be required to develop the land in any scenario. What negative effects would aTIF district have for the Edina community? Since the public works site is characterized as "blighted," the taxes from Tax Stream 1 would be a very small amount. In the example that follows, Edina Public Schools would lose out on $ 4.7M in tax revenue from this development over a period of 26 years. The City loses out on $ 6AM in tax revenue. In the case of private / public development scenarios currently being considered, the residents lose and the developers win. Edina Community Center Proposal TAX INCREMENT s FINANCING AFTER a TIF °ag jO�oQ`� Oco The assessed Incremental value property °a Assessed Value • °Qe�`i Q` belong to all m Incremental property tax the taxing b ty dNstrlcts. toopay pro]erl costs After 5 10 115 20 26 years 26 Year TIF_ Crested Terminated 0 Source: httpJ /bit.ly /1 HjBMsn How will Edina taxpayers benefit from a TIF district for Grandview? In the private/ public scenario on the next page, Edina residents get about 340 parking spaces and infrastructure that would be required to develop the land in any scenario. What negative effects would aTIF district have for the Edina community? Since the public works site is characterized as "blighted," the taxes from Tax Stream 1 would be a very small amount. In the example that follows, Edina Public Schools would lose out on $ 4.7M in tax revenue from this development over a period of 26 years. The City loses out on $ 6AM in tax revenue. In the case of private / public development scenarios currently being considered, the residents lose and the developers win. Edina Community Center Proposal PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.Publ!cGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com WHAT DOES A GRANDVIEW TIF LOOK LIKE? Assumptions Scenario #2 - calculate with high end costs High density residential (not hotel) Net tax capacity value of $70M (estimated) Public Parking 240 civic, 100 park/ride 340 Parking Requirements Private parking (225 +48 +150) 423 TOTAL parking spaces needed 763 Cost of Parking - $20,000 per spot $ 15,260,000 City Tax (.0035) $ 245,000 • Yearly tax on$70M School Tax -Net Tax Capacity (.0026) $ 182,000 Annual County Tax (.0062) $434,000 Total Annual Tax $ 861,000 After 26 Years Total TIF $ 22,386,000 Pay for Parking $ 15,260,000 Pay for Infrastructure up to $8M $ 8,000,000 Upon completion of TIF: The school district loses out on $4.7M in tax revenue The city loses out on $6.4M in tax revenue Edina residents get 340 parking spaces and infrastructure that would have been built to develop the land in any type of scenario • 8 Edina Community Center Proposal PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com CRITICISMS OF 100% PUBLIC OPTION Let's get this piece of property back on the tax rolls • With the use of TIF, property taxes from this property will not go into the general fund for up to 26 years. People want public space, but they don't want to pay for it. • There is no data to support this statement. • In the Community Needs Assessment conducted last November, 7300 of residents surveyed either strongly support or somewhat support the construction of a community center on the former public works site -with programming that includes fitness and wellness. • In the same study, only 10% were not supportive of a community center. There were promises made that the city would sell the former public works site to help pay for the new public works site • There were statements made, but no promises (at least not in public). • The city council made the decision to purchase the new public works site and bond for the new public works facility but did not couple that decision with a decision or promise to sell the former public works site. • The Comprehensive Plan and the Framework can also be seen as promises. We need private development to help pay for public improvements • TIF cannot be used for an arts or performing arts center that is publicly owned. It can't be used for parks. It can be used for infrastructure (utilities, new street, streetscape, sidewalks, parking) that a developer can be required to pay for anyway. We don't need another fitness facility in Edina • There are different customers for different markets.The person who joins a community center fitness facility may not be interested in joining a private for -profit or non -profit fitness center • Edina's aging demographics will require fitness spaces. It was the second most requested programming in the Community Needs and Assessment study. • A community center is not only about fitness —it's about community. Community centers lose money. We don't want to subsidize a facility. • The City has subsidized the Arts Center and recreational enterprise facilities for years. • Fitness facilities tend to make money; arts and performing arts facilities tend to lose money. Blending fitness with the arts can help to make a facility financially sustainable. We don't want to compete against private business • The city currently competes against private business: golf courses, swimming pool, hockey • arena, sports dome, liquor stores. Edina Community Center Proposal PUBLIC 0 GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com /contact@PublicGrandview.com A PERSPECTIVE FROM OTHERS Tom O'Rourke Executive Director of Charleston County Park and Recreation Commission 'As an example, in our agency we exist to improve the quality of life in Charleston County. If we wanted to, we could very easily get rid of all the things that do not make money, but that would disenfranchise many of the people in Charleston," O'Rourke says. "Instead, we choose to create enterprise ventures that will make a profit so that we can keep open places that will never make money and were never intended to make money. I would put our efficiency model up against anyone, public or private. For us, it is not about money, it is about being able to provide our services for everyone." pa la ; Dr. Ed Ehlinger, M.D., M.S.P.H. Minnesota State Health Commissioner "Everybody should have the opportunity to be healthy, regardless of your zip code, your ethnicity, your language, your sexual preference." Discussion: Community wellness recreation center - Estes Valley A new center provides opportunities for a plethora of positive benefits to community members. Some of these include: keeping kids occupied and off the streets; increased community awareness; a "community hub "and a cohesive sense of community where friends and family can meet, exercise, fitness and conditioning; fun and entertainment, learning and education; relaxation; healthy lifestyles; social benefits; group participation and multi - generational interaction. http: / /bit.ty /1 L4PJJg 10 Edina Community Center Proposal 0 PUBLIC GRANDVIEW www.PublicGrandview.com / contact @PublicGrandview.com COMPARISON OF FITNESS CENTERS 1. Do we need a fitness center? We already have private for -profit and private non -profit fitness centers in Edina. 2. Let's use a private fitness club in our public community center, then we don't have to worry about losing money. Consider these factors when weighing in on the above questions: Public Activity /Wellness Centers Central focus is community; goals are community driven Well designed and well run centers are profitable, community benefits from profits, or helps offset losses from arts /culture. City controls programming to align with mission and values City maintains presence /identity and trust with public front porch/ living room City can become more attractive to young families, provide healthy opportunities for teens, and fitness for residents over 55. Gym environment more relaxed and friendly, fosters community connections Attracts people from diverse age groups and socio- economic ranges - open to all Offer wide range of child and youth services (childcare, kid's programming) Offerings for people with disabilities - also employees people with disabilities • Provides a sense of community belonging Edina Community Center Proposal Private For -Profit / Private Non -Profit Fitness Centers Limited to private members who can afford the membership fees Driven by and benefits from operating profits The private club controls the programming, community values not included City cannot control employment policies Caters to a limited population - typically with age restrictions Atmosphere can discourage people with disabilities More advanced fitness options Competitive environment City loses opportunity for presence and identity No opportunity to implement community wellness goals City loses opportunity for public gathering space for all ages EF Heather Branigin I is From: Peter Kennedy <peterkennedy @live.com> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 3:16 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: City Council and engineering Hello, I reside at 5009 edin brook lane in edina. I am unable to make the meeting tomorrow night but I want to put forth my full support for the wall being built a long 100. It would be a great addition for myself and my family. Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help get this approved. Thank you for your time. Peter Kennedy • 0 0 Heather Branigin From: david.colwell @comcast.net Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 3:54 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Noise wall improvments for TH100 from Minnehaha Creek to Vernon To City Council and Engineering: I support the proposal. It has been a long time in coming. David Colwell 5012 Edinbrook Lane Edina, Mn 55436 {952} 925 -1396 • 0 Heather Branigin 1 0 From: Sent: To: Subject: To whom it may concern, Nicole Evenson <nicolebeckius @gmail.com> Monday, May 18, 2015 10:22 PM Edina Mail Attn:city council and engineering My husband and I want to take the time to voice (in writing) our extreme support for the highway noise wall along highway 100. We have been in the neighborhood almost 2 years and were contemplating moving or a home remodel. This wall project would keep us in the neighborhood happily! We cannot say enough how much this would improve the area, home values and basic day to day living. This is a great opportunity for us and we are keeping our fingers crossed that it is approved! Thank you for the time and consideration, Nicole, John & Alexa Evenson 5017 Edinbrook Lane 651.208.7415 Sent from my iPhone 0 • • Heather Branigin From: david bruflodt <dabOlb @yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 1:55 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: TH100 Noise Wall - Attention City Council & Engineering We oppose the TH100 noise wall for the following reasons: 1. It is not clear to us what the wall height will be adjacent to our property. 2. We are worried about how much morning sun we will lose due to the wall. 3. We are worried about the loss of trees and green growth behind our property. 3. $3000 is still a lot of money for a small amount of noise reduction. Thank you for your consideration. David and Patti Bruflodt 4837 Westbrook Lane • 11 n To: City Council From: Human Rights and Relations Commission Cc: Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager Date: May 6, 2015 Subject: Vision Edina Feedback Attachments: None Action Requested: A, o I Consider the following recommended changes to the Vision Edina Strategic Vision and Framework. Recommendation: General Statement: There are multiple references in the Strategic Vision and Framework to affordable housing in Edina. However, the Strategic Actions do not specifically address affordable housing. The Human Rights and Relations Commission believes that _an overarching housing policy should include an expression of the need for continuously considering the affordable housing component in the exploration of all housing strategies. Creation of a vibrant multicultural community, where people from across the social- economic spectrum live and work together, should be a basis for all further housing policy decisions. Page 4. Edina's Vision Statement, Second Bullet Point under Inclusive & Connected: The statement that the community offers a mix of residential development that includes "higher density multi - family options, especially for the young and the old" does not adequately describe the fact that a lot of families with children live in apartments and townhomes in Edina. Suggested edit: strike the phrase "especially for the young and old." STAFF COMMENTS: While it is true that families live in multi - family housing, the intent here was to call out the fact that housing options for the young and old are particularly limited. Page 7. #I. Residential Development Mix Original Text: "Residential neighborhoods continue to serve as the defining characteristic of the city, and there is a high desire to protect and enhance such neighborhoods." The word protect has connotations of protecting from another, and we think the original intention was to preserve the character of older neighborhoods. Suggested Edit: Change "protect" to "preserve" and remove the word high. Page 2 O INNN STAFF COMMENTS: We left the descriptive "high" because we feel that the data supports this conclusion. We changed "protect" to "preserve ". Page 7, # 1. Residential Development Mix Original phrase: "there is also recognition of some need to develop more multi - family options in order to serve the needs of young professionals and our senior citizens, and create some diversity in housing affordability." We are concerned about the words "some" and "young professionals." Suggested Edit: "There is recognition of the need to develop more multi - family options in order to serve the needs of Edina residents and to increase diversity in housing affordability." STAFF COMMENTS: The latest version, while not the exact wording proposed here, reflects a similar intent. Page 7 # 1. Residential Development Mix, Last Bullet Point under Strategic Actions: Mentioning neighborhoods is unnecessarily specific and limiting. Additionally, should / could the document utilize a different word than "fringes" (which has a negative connotation) for describing exploration of multi - family development opportunities on the "fringes" of other mixed -use areas and public spaces? Is this an issue of zoning? • Suggested edit: "Continue to explore options for new multi - family development opportunities throughout the City of Edina in mixed -use areas and public spaces." STAFF COMMENTS: We think it is beneficial to identify key areas where multifamily housing could be appropriate. We replaced with "Continue to explore options for new multi - family development opportunities throughout the City of Edina in mixed -use areas and near public spaces, including areas such as Southdale, Pentagon Park and Grandview" Page 7. #I. Residential Development Mix, Strategic Actions: There is no action that references how to manage the teardown issue. Should there be something else in the action plan to address this issue? STAFF COMMENTS: The Framework only suggests a few strategic actions but does not attempt to be inclusive of all issues or actions. This type of detail is more appropriate for the Comprehensive Plan. Page 10. #4. Live and Work. Introductory Paragraph and First Bullet Point under Issues: Identifying "young professionals" as the ones who want to live and work in the same area misses the larger issue that many different people would like to live and work in the same area. The "relatively high cost of quality housing" as noted in the introductory paragraph impacts more than "young professionals." Suggested Edit: Remove both uses of the phrase "young professionals." • • Page 3 e >1 � % O v P � IHHN STAFF COMMENTS: While it is true that many people may want to live and work in the same area, this trend is especially documented in the millennial generation. Page 10. #4. Live and Work. Third Bullet Point under Issues: Original text: "Many key staff in organizations across Edina cannot afford to live in the community, creating a service disconnect ". First, the issue is broader than "key staff in organizations" across Edina and includes employees who work in Edina who cannot afford to live in the community. Second, the phrase "service disconnect" is vague and should be omitted. Finally, there is no action to address this issue of the lack of availability of affordable housing. Suggested edit: "Many people who work in Edina cannot afford to live in the community." STAFF COMMENTS: Changed. Page 12. #6 Population Mix, Second Bullet Point under Issues: The high housing cost isn't a perceived barrier ... it is a barrier. There isn't much housing stock in • certain cost ranges, and teardowns are exacerbating this issue. There is no action to address this issue of the lack of availability of affordable housing. Suggested edit: "The high cost of housing is a barrier..." STAFF COMMENTS: Changed. Also added a strategic action related to affordable housing under Residential Mix. Page 12. #6 Population Mix, First Bullet Point under Strategic Actions: The first strategic action should remove the reference to the school district because this is a community -wide issue. Suggested edit: The City of Edina, in partnership with Edina Public Schools, should continue to expose students, parents, and other residents to a variety of cultural experiences. This will serve to foster a global mindset, while also cementing the education system as a key population draw. STAFF COMMENTS: Changed. �j • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS APRI 22, 2015 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll call were: Hobbs, Lee, Seeley, Strauss, Halva, Nemerov, Carr, Forrest and Platteter Absent: Olsen and Thorsen III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Commissioner Hobbs moved approval of the April 22, 2015, meeting agenda. Commissioner Carr seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. COMMUNITY COMMENT: • None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Subdivision. Janine and Jeffrey Johnson. 5825 Ashcroft Ave., Edina, MN Staff Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Janine and Jeffrey Johnson are proposing to subdivide their property at 5825 Ashcroft Avenue into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. To accommodate the request the following is required: I subdivision; 2 Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 31ot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,781 square feet for each lot. Teague explained that both lots would gain access off Ashcroft Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 6,790 square feet, median lot depth is 135 feet, and the median lot width is 50 feet. The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would be just short of the median area. There are four significant trees on the site. Each one of these trees would be maintained as a result of the subdivision. There are two smaller Cherry Trees located along the north lot line that would also be saved. 0 Page 1 of 9 • Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 5825 Ashcroft Avenue and the lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot, and lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,781 square feet for each lot. Approval is based on the following findings: I . Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. 3. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. There is a unique practical difficulty to the property caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties in the area, including every lot on the block. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. C. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots were originally platted. d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50 -foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved with these same circumstances by the City in the last few years. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. C. A grading, drainage and erosion control plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. The proposed plans shall meet all conditions outlined in the engineering memo dated April 15, 2015 d. There shall be no increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private property. e. Any disturbance to the roadway caused by the construction of the new homes must be • repaired by replacing the asphalt pavement from curb -to -curb and from saw -cut to saw - cut. Page 2 of 9 • f. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. g. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. Appearing for the Applicant Jeffrey and Janine Johnson, applicant and property owners Discussion Commissioner Forrest commented that she is having a hard time identifying the practical difficulty. She acknowledged that the Ordinance was changed after approval of the Fairfax plat; however, that Ordinance revision was to direct change; reiterating she is unsure of the practical difficulties. Planner Teague explained in his opinion the practical difficulty is that the subject property is double the size of all lots on this block, adding the proposed use of the property as two lots is reasonable. Teague further noted that the subject lot is the only lot on this block where two fifty foot lots were developed as one. Commissioner Lee also indicated she too was having trouble with practical difficulties. Continuing, Lee said in her opinion the practical difficulty is that this lot is being devalued because it is a 100 -foot lot on a block where the rest of the lots are 50 -feet. Concluding, Lee said she has no difficulty with the request for two fifty foot lots; however, can agree the one home on two lots is out of character for this block. Commissioner Nemerov asked if the large trees in the front (N -S) will stay. Planner Teague responded from his discussions with the applicant they indicated they intend to save those trees. Teague further noted that much would depend on driveway placement. Applicant Presentation Jeffrey Johnson introduced to the Commission his wife, Janine and realtor, Kim Melin. Johnson gave a brief history of his property and the Fairfax plat and with graphics pointed out the significance of the 500 -foot neighborhood and his property's location in that radius. Continuing, Johnson delivered a power point presentation highlighting the following There are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance to allow reasonable use of the property. Without the granting of a variance they cannot do with their land what the neighboring property owners can do with the same land. This property is twice the width and land area of every other lot in its block (Block 7 & Block 8). The proposed subdivision and variance would create harmony because the lots would be of similar size to that of other lots within this neighborhood. Page 3 of 9 s • The character of the neighborhood would not be compromised because if divided the lot would now be of similar size to the majority of lots within the 500 -foot neighborhood. It was the original intent of the plat. • The subdivision meets all the standards set forth in the subdivision ordinance. With regard to the trees Johnson said it is their intent to retain the two trees. He said he believes the driveway can be poured in such a way as to save the tree on the north; however, he added both trees may be trimmed. Discussion Commissioner Hobbs asked Mr. Johnson if he spoke with neighbors about the project. Mr. Johnson responded in the affirmative. He reported that he held a neighborhood "open house" in March that was attended by two neighbors. Johnson said both neighbors indicated their support for the subdivision. Continuing, Johnson further noted he received two e- mails; one in support and the other indicating they could not support the request on principle. Public Hearin Chair Platteter opened the public hearing. No one spoke to the issue. Commissioner Carr moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion Commissioner Nemerov asked if the preliminary plat were approved what would the setbacks for the new home(s) be. Teague responded a recent change in ordinance dictates a 12 -foot total side yard setback with no less than 5 -feet on one side. 6 -6 or 7 -5 is what the City currently sees. Commissioner Carr stated she can support the request as submitted. She further added that she agrees with City staff on practical difficulties. Commissioner Forrest said while it's not unreasonable for the applicant to want two lots she continues to struggle with practical difficulties. Commissioner Forrest acknowledged the neighborhood is changing and currently there are teardowns within this area on 50 -foot lots; however, is skeptical on the practical difficulties but not strongly adverse to the request. Chair Platteter indicated he can support the request, adding it is reasonable. Commissioner Nemerov stated if the Commission was to approve the preliminary plat he would like it conditioned that the lots need to be developed in compliance with the tree ordinance. Commissioners agreed with that as a condition of approval. Page 4 of 9 Motion Commissioner Lee moved to recommend preliminary plat approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions to include compliance with the Tree Ordinance. Commissioner Nemerov seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Commissioner Forrest asked the applicant to be very careful with the Bur Oak during the construction phase of the project. Chair Platteter further requested that special attention was paid to condition d. "There shall be no increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private property." VI. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS A. Variance. Kelly Hayes, 6205 Wooddale Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Aaker reported this item was continued at the last Planning Commission meeting so the applicant could address concerns raised by Commission Members is regard to the quality of building plans submitted. Aaker said for your review the applicant submitted professionally drawn plans on April 15, 2015. The plans are consistent with the original plans and survey and the request for variance remains the same with all other aspects of the plan conforming to ordinance requirements. Appearing for the Applicant Karen Hayes, applicant and property owner. Discussion A discussion ensued regarding the proposed second floor and if the existing walls would be able to support the proposed addition. Commissioner Forrest suggested that if the Commission has difficulty and are uncertain the existing walls could support the second floor they could condition any approval on if more than 50% of the building walls are removed they must return to the Commission for review. Commissioner Lee said she also has an issue with the north elevation of the house. She acknowledged the north elevation faces a parking lot; however, in her opinion this wall should be broken up by adding a decorative band, windows or some other form of architectural detail to break up the wall mass. Continuing, Lee further stated she has no problem with the variance, adding her concern was if the project becomes a "tear down "; in her opinion, the Page 5 of 9 applicant needs to return to the Commission for review. Lee added she also wants architectural detail added to the north building wall. Motion Commissioner Forrest moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions including the following conditions 1) should more than 50% of the building walls be removed the applicant must return to the Commission; and 2) add architectural detail to the north elevation. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Lot Division procedure, Rezoning procedure, side yard setbacks, regulations, R -2 District regulations Planner Presentation Chair Platteter asked Planner Teague to report on the revisions to the ordinance including Commissioner Forrest's window well information. Planner Teague reported that a definition has been added for window well. The definition would include all types of window wells. Commissioner Forrest commented that basically she would also like to see setbacks measured from the outer edge of the structure. Planner Teague told the Commission there were three revised items. • Define window well • In Section 3 — Plan modifications — what triggers return to the Planning Commission; • Non - conforming. Replacing duplex in the R -2 District — language added. In summary Teague clarified the following changes to each section: ) Lot Division /Party Wall. This change would allow a lot division (adjustment to an existing lot line), and a party wall division of an existing duplex to be done administratively. Teague reported that the majority of Cities in the area process these types of request administratively. Teague further noted that this action doesn't create a new lot, only changes a lot line or allows the split of a duplex along the party wall to facilitate separate owners. In both cases no building, etc. is involved with the split. 2) Window Well. Added a definition of window well. 3) Plan Modifications. This section was changed to clarify when site modifications should go back before the Planning Commission. Teague noted on page 5 strike all after site plan. 4) Procedure for Rezoning. This sections (4 &5) was amended to reduce the steps an applicant takes to receive final rezoning approval. Presently it's a two -step process and the amendment would create a swifter process for certain rezoning's from two -step to • one and one half. Page 6 of 9 • 5) Building Coverage etc. (6 &7). Revisions add clarity to building coverage exemptions and side yard setback requirement. Eliminate c. Interior side yard setback. 6) Section 8 — R -2 District Regulations. Teague said in this instance the suggestion is to allow single family homes in the R -2 zoning district. Currently the Code prohibits it. Teague said staff believes there is some disagreement from the Commission with the proposed change. 7) Building Height Section 9. Corrects an error on the table. 8) Nonconforming R -2 Lots. This changes allow duplexes on existing nonconforming R -2 lot to be torn down and rebuilt within the need for variance. Discussion Commissioner Forrest said if the window well definition is approved she wants to reiterate she would like the setback measured from the outermost edge of the window well surrounding structure. Forrest also said she is hesitant on window wells on front facades and suggested that they be subject to the same setbacks as the main house. Chair Platteter also commented he continues to support the additional public hearing; however, understands the time restraints. Platteter said that at this time he believes the Commission can vote on all items except for Section 8/R -2 District Regulations, adding that item should be voted on alone. 0 Motion • Commissioner Forrest moved to recommend approval of the proposed Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 32 and 36 of the Edina City Code excluding Section 8. R -2 District Regulations. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Commissioner Carr moved to recommend approval of Section 8. R -2 District Regulations. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. A discussion ensued on Section 8. R -2 District Regulations with the majority of Commissioners expressing objection to the proposed change. Commissioners indicated if the change were permitted the diversity of the housing stock would change, affordability could be lost and the buffer zone into the R- I District shrunk. Commissioner Nemerov noted that the locations of Edina's R -2 zoning districts are scattered and depending on the area change could mean different things. He suggested making a decision on this issue after adoption of Vision Edina. Chair Platteter called for the vote: Ayes; Carr. Nays; Hobbs, Lee, Nemerov, Olsen, Strauss, Platteter. Motion failed. Page 7 of 9 0 C. Pentagon Park —Development Update (Scott Takenoff) Planner Teague informed the Commission Pentagon Park is a 43 acre development that has received preliminary approval to PUD, adding Scott Takenoff with Hillcrest is present this evening for a project update. Mr. Takenoff introduced himself and his team; Bob Close, Bob Close Studio, LLC and Tom Witlock. Scott Takenoff told the Commission Pentagon Park was constructed in the 1960's as a state of the art office complex. The complex consisted of 8 three story office buildings, one four story office building and a six -story "Tower ". All buildings are surrounded by surface parking. Immediately north of the site is the Fred Richards Golf Course which is currently being studied for repurposing. Takenoff delivered a power point presentation highlighting the sites past, present (renovation of existing structures) and the future. Continuing, Takenoff said the project will be developed in phases into a state -of- the -art development with the emphasis on office use. Other uses could include a hotel, restaurants, and retail. Takenoff further indicated they would also consider housing. Takenoff said if housing is developed that could feed into the businesses reducing vehicle traffic. Takenoff said he also envisions bike stations, electric car hookups, shared parking sites and underground parking. Takenoff said one key element he remembers from past meetings with the • Commission and Council was to create the ability to keep the site active after 5 pm. Another goal is to go from gray to green, adding the goal is to not have parking be the focal point. Bob Close addressed the Commission and explained the six principles of the site: • Green Streets • Integrated Stormwater • Pedestrian Friendly 77`h • Connect west to east • Multimodal connections • Shared parking. Mr. Witlock briefed the Commission on proposed building heights explaining building heights would range from two to twelve stories based on location. Discussion Chair Platteter noted this area is also being studied for involvement in a regional trail system. Mr. Takenoff agreed, adding Hillcrest would be meeting with those involved with the trail system. Commissioner Forrest commented that she observed increased activity on the site. Mr. Takenoff responded that Hillcrest hired a general contractor to manage the demolition as the • project moves through its different phases. Continuing, Takenoff said he envisions a fresh concept hotel and the creation of an active appealing space. Takenoff said he wants all Page 8 of 9 components to mesh. He further noted that the phases are market driven and he is unsure if they will break ground in 2015. Takenoff said patience is needed to redevelop the 42 -acre site to its highest potential. Takenoff said he believes redevelopment will move west to east. Commissioner Nemerov asked if the "refreshed" buildings are successful. Takenoff responded in the affirmative. He said the tenants are smaller, adding they turned a C- building into a B, B+ building. Concluding, Takenoff reiterated this is a phased market driven redevelopment that they hope will appeal to all; baby- boomers, millennials, everyone. Chair Platteter thanked the development team for their update. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Chair Platteter acknowledged back of packet materials. VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Hobbs briefed the Commission on past meetings of the Southdale France Area Work Group and reported Saturday, April 25, 2015 a "Check -In" meeting is scheduled at the Edina Senior Center from 10:00 -Noon. Hobbs said everyone is invited to attend. Chair Platteter told the Commission he will be inviting the Heritage Preservation Board to meet with the Commission sometime in May to learn their process. Platteter further noted that he would like to schedule the Commission to take a "walk- about" in the greater Southdale area, adding that would probably occur sometime in June. Commissioner Lee reported she attended the Grand View open house. She noted that the proposed concepts are changing rapidly in response to feedback and the design team may be at a crossroads. The programming for the two major pieces, civic and residential, needs to be determined in order to know what will actually fit on the site. Transportation and site circulation are critical issues yet to be resolved. IX. STAFF COMMENTS No comments. X. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Nemerov moved meeting adjournment at 10:30 pm. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to adjourn carried. ctfully submitte Page 9 of 9 MINUTES OF THE • REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS APRI 22, 2015 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll call were: Hobbs, Lee, Seeley, Strauss, Halva, Nemerov, Carr, Forrest and Platteter Absent: Olsen and Thorsen III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Commissioner Hobbs moved approval of the April 22, 2015, meeting agenda. Commissioner Carr seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. COMMUNITY COMMENT: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Subdivision. Janine and Jeffrey Johnson. 5825 Ashcroft Ave., Edina, MN Staff Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Janine and Jeffrey Johnson are proposing to subdivide their property at 5825 Ashcroft Avenue into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. To accommodate the request the following is required: I subdivision; 2 Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 31ot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,781 square feet for each lot. Teague explained that both lots would gain access off Ashcroft Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 6,790 square feet, median lot depth is 135 feet, and the median lot width is 50 feet. The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would be just short of the median area. There are four significant trees on the site. Each one of these trees would be maintained as a result of the subdivision. There are two smaller Cherry Trees • located along the north lot line that would also be saved. s Page 1 of 9 • Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve,the proposed two lot subdivision of 5825 Ashcroft Avenue and the lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot, and lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,781 square feet for each lot. Approval is based on the following findings: Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. 3. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. There is a unique practical difficulty to the property caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties in the area, including every lot on the block. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. C. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots were originally platted. • d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50 -foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved with these same circumstances by the City in the last few years. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. C. A grading, drainage and erosion control plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. The proposed plans shall meet all conditions outlined in the engineering memo dated April 15, 2015 d. There shall be no increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private property. e. Any disturbance to the roadway caused by the construction of the new homes must be repaired by replacing the asphalt pavement from curb -to -curb and from saw -cut to saw - cut. Page 2 of 9 A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new . homes. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. Appearing for the Applicant Jeffrey and Janine Johnson, applicant and property owners Discussion Commissioner Forrest commented that she is having a hard time identifying the practical difficulty. She acknowledged that the Ordinance was changed after approval of the Fairfax plat; however, that Ordinance revision was to direct change; reiterating she is unsure of the practical difficulties. Planner Teague explained in his opinion the practical difficulty is that the subject property is double the size of all lots on this block, adding the proposed use of the property as two lots is reasonable. Teague further noted that the subject lot is the only lot on this block where two fifty foot lots were developed as one. Commissioner Lee also indicated she too was having trouble with practical difficulties. Continuing, Lee said in her opinion the practical difficulty is that this lot is being devalued because it is a 100 -foot lot on a block where the rest of the lots are 50 -feet. Concluding, Lee said she has no difficulty with the request for two fifty foot lots; however, can agree the one home on two lots is out of character for this block. • Commissioner Nemerov asked if the large trees in the front (N -S) will stay. Planner Teague responded from his discussions with the applicant they indicated they intend to save those trees. Teague further noted that much would depend on driveway placement. Applicant Presentation Jeffrey Johnson introduced to the Commission his wife, Janine and realtor, Kim Melin. Johnson gave a brief history of his property and the Fairfax plat and with graphics pointed out the significance of the 500 -foot neighborhood and his property's location in that radius. Continuing, Johnson delivered a power point presentation highlighting the following • There are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance to allow reasonable use of the property. Without the granting of a variance they cannot do with their land what the neighboring property owners can do with the same land. • This property is twice the width and land area of every other lot in its block (Block 7 & Block 8). • The proposed subdivision and variance would create harmony because the lots would be of similar size to that of other lots within this neighborhood. r� LJ Page 3 of 9 • • The character of the neighborhood would not be compromised because if divided the lot would now be of similar size to the majority of lots within the 500 -foot neighborhood. It was the original intent of the plat. • The subdivision meets all the standards set forth in the subdivision ordinance. With regard to the trees Johnson said it is their intent to retain the two trees. He said he believes the driveway can be poured in such a way as to save the tree on the north; however, he added both trees may be trimmed. Discussion Commissioner Hobbs asked Mr. Johnson if he spoke with neighbors about the project. Mr. Johnson responded in the affirmative. He reported that he held a neighborhood "open house" in March that was attended by two neighbors. Johnson said both neighbors indicated their support for the subdivision. Continuing, Johnson further not_ ed he received two e- mails; one in support and the other indicating they could not support the request on principle. Public Hearin Chair Platteter opened the public hearing. No one spoke to the issue. . Commissioner Carr moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. 0 Discussion Commissioner Nemerov asked if the preliminary plat were approved what would the setbacks for the new home(s) be. Teague responded a recent change in ordinance dictates a 12 -foot total side yard setback with no less than 5 -feet on one side. 6 -6 or 7 -5 is what the City currently sees. Commissioner Carr stated she can support the request as submitted. She further added that she agrees with City staff on practical difficulties. Commissioner Forrest said while it's not unreasonable for the applicant to want two lots she continues to struggle with practical difficulties. Commissioner Forrest acknowledged the neighborhood is changing and currently there are teardowns within this area on 50 -foot lots; however, is skeptical on the practical difficulties but not strongly adverse to the request. Chair Platteter indicated he can support the request, adding it is reasonable. Commissioner Nemerov stated if the Commission was to approve the preliminary plat he would like it conditioned that the lots need to be developed in compliance with the tree ordinance. Commissioners agreed with that as a condition of approval. Page 4 of 9 Motion 0 Commissioner Lee moved to recommend preliminary plat approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions to include compliance with the Tree Ordinance. Commissioner Nemerov seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Commissioner Forrest asked the applicant to be very careful with the Bur Oak during the construction phase of the project. Chair Platteter further requested that special attention was paid to condition d. "There shall be no increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private property." VI. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS A. Variance. Kelly Hayes, 6205 Wooddale Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Aaker reported this item was continued at the last Planning Commission meeting so the applicant could address concerns raised by Commission Members is regard to the quality of building plans submitted. • Aaker said for your review the applicant submitted professionally drawn plans on April 15, 2015. The plans are consistent with the original plans and survey and the request for variance remains the same with all other aspects of the plan conforming to ordinance requirements. Appearing for the Applicant Karen Hayes, applicant and property owner. Discussion A discussion ensued regarding the proposed second floor and if the existing walls would be able to support the proposed addition. Commissioner Forrest suggested that if the Commission has difficulty and are uncertain the existing walls could support the second floor they could condition any approval on if more than 50% of the building walls are removed they must return to the Commission for review. Commissioner Lee said she also has an issue with the north elevation of the house. She acknowledged the north elevation faces a parking lot; however, in her opinion this wall should be broken up by adding a decorative band, windows or some other form of architectural detail to break up the wall mass. Continuing, Lee further stated she has no problem with the variance, adding her concern was if the project becomes a "tear down "; in her opinion, the Page 5 of 9 • applicant needs to return to the Commission for review. Lee added she also wants architectural detail added to the north building wall. Mntinn Commissioner Forrest moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions including the following conditions 1) should more than 50% of the building walls be removed the applicant must return to the Commission; and 2) add architectural detail to the north elevation. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Lot Division procedure, Rezoning procedure, side yard setbacks, regulations, R -2 District regulations Planner Presentation Chair Platteter asked Planner Teague to report on the revisions to the ordinance including Commissioner Forrest's window well information. Planner Teague reported that a definition has been added for window well. The definition would include all types of window wells. Commissioner Forrest commented that basically she • would also like to see setbacks measured from the outer edge of the structure. Planner Teague told the Commission there were three revised items. • Define window well • In Section 3 — Plan modifications — what triggers return to the Planning Commission; • Non - conforming. Replacing duplex in the R -2 District — language added. In summary Teague clarified the following changes to each section: I) Lot Division /Party Wall. This change would allow a lot division (adjustment to an existing lot line), and a party wall division of an existing duplex to be done administratively. Teague reported that the majority of Cities in the area process these types of request administratively. Teague further noted that this action doesn't create a new lot, only changes a lot line or allows the split of a duplex along the party wall to facilitate separate owners. In both cases no building, etc. is involved with the split. 2) Window Well. Added a definition of window well. 3) Plan Modifications. This section was changed to clarify when site modifications should go back before the Planning Commission. Teague noted on page 5 strike all after site plan. 4) Procedure for Rezoning. This sections (4 &5) was amended to reduce the steps an applicant takes to receive final rezoning approval. Presently it's a two -step process and S the amendment would create a swifter process for certain rezoning's from two -step to one and one half. Page 6 of 9 5) Building Coverage etc. (6 &7). Revisions add clarity to building coverage exemptions and • side yard setback requirement. Eliminate c. Interior side yard setback. 6) Section 8 — R -2 District Regulations. Teague said in this instance the suggestion is to allow single family homes in the R -2 zoning district. Currently the Code prohibits it. Teague said staff believes there is some disagreement from the Commission with the proposed change. 7) Building Height Section 9. Corrects an error on the table. 8) Nonconforming R -2 Lots. This changes allow duplexes on existing nonconforming R -2 lot to be torn down and rebuilt within the need for variance. Discussion Commissioner Forrest said if the window well definition is approved she wants to reiterate she would like the setback measured from the outermost edge of the window well surrounding structure. Forrest also said she is hesitant on window wells on front facades and suggested that they be subject to the same setbacks as the main house. Chair Platteter also commented he continues to support the additional public hearing; however, understands the time restraints. Platteter said that at this time he believes the Commission can vote on all items except for Section 8/R -2 District Regulations, adding that item should be voted on alone. Motion Commissioner Forrest moved to recommend approval of the proposed Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 32 and 36 of the Edina City Code excluding Section 8. R -2 District Regulations. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Commissioner Carr moved to recommend approval of Section 8. R -2 District Regulations. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. A discussion ensued on Section 8. R -2 District Regulations with the majority of Commissioners expressing objection to the proposed change. Commissioners indicated if the change were permitted the diversity of the housing stock would change, affordability could be lost and the buffer zone into the R- I District shrunk. Commissioner Nemerov noted that the locations of Edina's R -2 zoning districts are scattered and depending on the area change could mean different things. He suggested making a decision on this issue after adoption of Vision Edina. Chair Platteter called for the vote: Ayes; Carr. Nays; Hobbs, Lee, Nemerov, Olsen, Strauss, Platteter. Motion failed. • Page 7 of 9 • C. Pentagon Park — Development Update (Scott Takenoff) Planner Teague informed the Commission Pentagon Park is a 43 acre development that has received preliminary approval to PUD, adding Scott Takenoff with Hillcrest is present this evening for a project update. Mr. Takenoff introduced himself and his team; Bob Close, Bob Close Studio, LLC and Tom Witlock. Scott Takenoff told the Commission Pentagon Park was constructed in the 1960's as a state of the art office complex. The complex consisted of 8 three story office buildings, one four story office building and a six -story "Tower ". All buildings are surrounded by surface parking. Immediately north of the site is the Fred Richards Golf Course which is currently being studied for repurposing. Takenoff delivered a power point presentation highlighting the sites past, present (renovation of existing structures) and the future. Continuing, Takenoff said the project will be developed in phases into a state -of- the -art development with the emphasis on office use. Other uses could include a hotel, restaurants, and retail. Takenoff further indicated they would also consider housing. Takenoff said if housing is developed that could feed into the businesses reducing vehicle traffic. Takenoff said he also envisions bike stations, electric car hookups, shared parking sites and underground parking. Takenoff said one key element he remembers from past meetings with the Commission and Council was to create the ability to keep the site active after 5 pm. Another goal is to go from gray to green, adding the goal is to not have parking be the focal point. Bob Close addressed the Commission and explained the six principles of the site: • Green Streets • Integrated Stormwater • Pedestrian Friendly 77`h • Connect west to east • Multimodal connections • Shared parking. Mr. Witlock briefed the Commission on proposed building heights explaining building heights would range from two to twelve stories based on location. Discussion Chair Platteter noted this area is also being studied for involvement in a regional trail system. Mr. Takenoff agreed, adding Hillcrest would be meeting with those involved with the trail system. Commissioner Forrest commented that she observed increased activity on the site. Mr. Takenoff responded that Hillcrest hired a general contractor to manage the demolition as the project moves through its different phases. Continuing, Takenoff said he envisions a fresh concept hotel and the creation of an active appealing space. Takenoff said he wants all Page 8 of 9 components to mesh. He further noted that the phases are market driven and he is unsure if they will break ground in 2015. Takenoff said patience is needed to redevelop the 42 -acre site to its highest potential. Takenoff said he believes redevelopment will move west to east. Commissioner Nemerov asked if the "refreshed" buildings are successful. Takenoff responded in the affirmative. He said the tenants are smaller, adding they turned a C- building into a B, B+ building. Concluding, Takenoff reiterated this is a phased market driven redevelopment that they hope will appeal to all; baby- boomers, millennials, everyone. Chair Platteter thanked the development team for their update. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Chair Platteter acknowledged back of packet materials. VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Hobbs briefed the Commission on past meetings of the Southdale France Area Work Group and reported Saturday, April 25, 2015 a "Check -In" meeting is scheduled at the Edina Senior Center from 10:00 -Noon. Hobbs said everyone is invited to attend. do Chair Platteter told the Commission he will be inviting the Heritage Preservation Board to meet with the Commission sometime in May to learn their process. Platteter further noted that he would like to schedule the Commission to take a "walk- about" in the greater Southdale area, adding that would probably occur sometime in June. Commissioner Lee reported she attended the Grand View open house. She noted that the proposed concepts are changing rapidly in response to feedback and the design team may be at a crossroads. The programming for the two major pieces, civic and residential, needs to be determined in order to know what will actually fit on the site. Transportation and site circulation are critical issues yet to be resolved. IX. STAFF COMMENTS No comments. X. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Nemerov moved meeting adjournment at 10:30 pm. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to adjourn carried. :- -, Page 9 of 9 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS APRIL 8, 2015 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll call were: Hobbs, Lee, Seeley, Halva, Strauss, Thorsen, Nemerov, Olsen, Carr, Forrest and Platteter III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Commissioner Carr moved approval of the April 8, 2015, meeting agenda. Commissioner Thorsen seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA • Commissioner Carr moved approval of the March 11, 2015 meeting minutes. Commissioner Nemerov seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT: No comment. Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Nemerov seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Variance — Andrew & Megan Wirth, 4230 Scott Terrace, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Approve a 7.65 foot variance from the required 39.65 foot front yard setback requirement for the addition of a front room and porch on the main floor with basement area below to be located 32 feet from the front property line for the property located at 4230 Scott Terrace. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variance based on the following findings: 1 Y-- 1. The proposed use is permitted in the R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with all the standards, with exception of the front yard setback (as determined by the average of the two adjacent homes). 2. The proposed additions are appropriate in size and scale for the lot and the improvements will enhance the property. 3. There is a practical difficulty in meeting the ordinance requirements and there are circumstances unique to the property due to an imposed front yard setback from adjacent properties. 4. The variance, if approved, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The proposed setback is still over 4 feet farther back from the front lot line than a neighboring home down the block. Approval of the variance is also subject to the following conditions: 1) Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans: Survey date stamped march 9, 2015 and Building plans and elevations date stamped March 9, 2015. 2) Compliance with the Environmental Engineer's memo. Appearing for the Applicant Andrew and Megan Wirth, applicants and property owners. Discussion Commissioner Olsen asked if the house was nonconforming with regard to front yard setback. Planner Aaker responded in the affirmative. Chair Platteter asked Planner Aaker if any other portions of the home were nonconforming. Planner Aaker responded only the front yard setback is nonconforming. Applicant Presentation Mr. Wirth addressed the Commission and explained how much he loves his house and living in the neighborhood. Wirth said they considered numerous options; however, found the plan proposed works best for the site and is less disruptive. Discussion Commissioner Forrest asked the applicant if he ever considered building to the rear. She further asked the size of the proposed egress window. Mr. Wirth said going out the rear would reduce rear yard space and cause the removal of a very large tree. Wirth said it was very important to his family to save that tree. In response to the question on egress window well size Mr. Wirth reported it measures 10' 10 ". Forrest • questioned why the applicant is adding the egress window to the front of the home and not the side. A brief discussion ensued on egress window well locations with the applicant explaining if the egress window were relocated to the side yard it would be too close to the neighboring property and neighbors support the location. Chair Platteter acknowledged that the Commission received numerous letter of support for the project. Platteter opened the public hearing. Public Hearing Robert Schumacher, 4232 Scott Terrace, addressed the Commission and voiced his full support for the project as presented. A resident at 4220 Scott Terrace supports the project as presented. Chair Platteter asked if anyone else would like to speak to the project; being none, Commissioner Olsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Carr seconded the motion all voted aye; motion carried. Discussion • Commissioner Lee complimented the applicants on their presented materials. Lee said in her opinion the project is modest in scale and is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Forrest said that while she believes the project is designed with sensitivity she cannot support the request because of the added encroachment of the egress window into the setback. Motion Commissioner Carr moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Thorsen seconded the motion. Ayes; Hobbs, Lee, Thorsen, Strauss, Olsen, Nemerov, Carr, Platteter. Nay; Forrest. Motion carried 801. B. Variance — Kelly Hayes, 6205 Wooddale Avenue, Edina, MN. Planner Presentation Appearing for the Applicant • Kelly Hayes, applicant and property owner. 0 Discussion Commissioner Carr asked if the plans presented were done by an architect. Planner Aaker responded that the City of Edina only requires scaled drawings, adding the City does not stipulate that the drawings need to be drawn by licensed architect. Aaker further explained that surveys and storm water management plans must be drawn and signed by a licensed professional. Aaker concluded that this application meets variance submittal requirements. Commissioner Lee said in her opinion the plans are too hard to read and are no more than sketches. Lee stated in order for her to make an educated decision the plans need more detail. Continuing, Lee also noted she is hesitant to act on this because there is the possibility that when they move into the demolition phase walls may go down because of inadequate support. Lee said she doesn't want to see another project end up like a previous variance project on Nancy Lane. Chair Platteter stated if the materials submitted meet City requirements as indicated by staff the request should be voted up or down. Planner Aaker reiterated what's important for planning purposes is that the survey and storm water management materials are professionally done; and indicate setbacks, elevations, building height and drainage patterns. • Applicant Presentation Ms. Hayes addressed the Commission and informed them the plans are hand drawn and are to scale -one square equal one -foot. Hayes said she was unaware the plans had to be professionally done. Hayes said the survey and water management were done by a professional. Discussion A discussion ensued on if the lot coverage indicated on the survey was correct. Planner Aaker recalculated the lot coverage and stated it is correct as stated, 19 %. Aaker further commented that the house sits in an unusual location abutting City property, pond and parking lot, adding any impact would be minimal. Commissioner Platteter asked Planner Aaker if the City received any comments from the neighbors. Planner Aaker responded no comments were received. Commissioner Platteter noted that trees were not indicated on the survey. Aaker responded that at this time that is not a requirement. Chair Platteter opened the public hearing. Public Comment • David Craig, 4436 Garrison Lane indicated his support for the project. 4 • Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Carr seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion The discussion continued with a number of Commissioners expressing their hesitation in voting on the application without adequate drawings. Concern was also expressed that the existing building walls would not be able to support the proposed second story. Ms. Hayes commented that technically there is a second floor; the walls are just "built up ". Chair Platteter asked Ms. Hayes if she would be willing to continue her request. Platteter said he believes from the discussion that "better" to scale drawings need to be submitted that identify what exists, what will stay, what would go and exterior building materials. Platteter suggested that Hayes work with staff on the new submittals. Ms. Hayes responded that she would be willing to continue her request to the next meeting; adding she would speak with staff to clarify what's required. Motion Commissioner Forrest moved to continue Agenda Item VI. B. to the Planning • Commission meeting on April 22, 2015. Commissioner Nemerov seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to continue carried. VII. C. Subdivision. Frank Berman. 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 & 5324 Blake Road, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that Frank Berman is proposing to combine and subdivide his four properties at 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 and 5324 Blake Road into seven lots. The existing home at 5331 Evanswood Lane would remain, and the home at 5324 Blake Road would be removed. The other two parcels are vacant. Teague explained that the applicant proposes to construct a 24 -foot wide cul -de -sac off Blake Road within a 40 -foot right -of -way. Two lots would access off Evanswood Lane, and the remaining five off the new road. The applicant has attempted to minimize tree loss and address drainage issues in the area by locating the roadway along the north lot line, and the stormwater retension areas along the street. • Planner Teague noted that this item was continued from the last Planning Commission for the applicant to revise the grading and drainage plan to address concerns raised by the city • engineering department. The applicant has revised the plans to address those concerns. The engineering department and Barr Engineering, the City's engineering consultant has reviewed the plans Teague said to accommodate the request Preliminary Plat approval is required. Continuing, Teague said all seven of the proposed lots meet the City's minimum lot size requirements. Minimum lot size, width and depth is determined by the median of all lots within 500 feet of the subject property. Based on the surveyors calculation of the medians, the minimum lot size is 21,842 s.f. in size; 166.4 feet in depth; and 120.8 feet in width. The engineering department has reviewed the calculations and lot sizes provided by the applicant's surveyor and does find them to be accurate. Planner Teague concluded that staff the plat meets all requirements and further recommends that the City Council approve the proposed seven lot subdivision based on the following findings: I . The proposal meets all the required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The applicant has reduced the width of the road, and minimized the stormwater ponding on the site in an attempt to minimize tree loss. 3. In meeting all city and watershed district requirements for drainage the proposed • subdivision would not have a negative impact on adjacent property. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: I . The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. Final plat shall include a complete grading and drainage plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. 2. At the time of final plat approval, the applicant shall enter into a Developers Agreement with the City. The Developers Agreement shall include the requirement for construction of the street as proposed, and a sidewalk on the south side of the street as recommended in the engineering memo dated March 30, 2015. The agreement shall also include all the conditions of approval. 3. Prior to release of the final plat, the following items must be submitted: a. Park dedication fee of $15,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. b. A construction management plan will be required for the overall development of the site. C. Submit evidence of a Nine Mile Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: • 6 • a. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. Driveway plans must be consistent with the proposed grading plan to preserve as many trees as possible. b. Individual homes must comply with the overall grading plan for the site. Each individual building permit will be reviewed for compliance with the overall grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. C. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. d. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. e. All homes must be constructed with fire sprinkler protection in accordance to NFPA 13d or IRC 2904. f. Signage stating "No Parking Fire Lane" along one side of the roadway the entire length of the road, and within the cul -de -sac. 5. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated March 30, 2015. 6. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the fire marshal's memo dated February 18, 2015. 7. A stop sign is required to be installed on the new street approaching Blake Road. Clear sight lines shall be maintained from the intersection. • 8. Compliance with the city's newly adopted tree ordinance. 9. Compliance with the city's living streets policy. Appearing for the Applicant Kendra Lindahl, Landform, Jack Perry, and Carrie Berman Discussion Planner Teague was asked to explain the loop water line suggested by engineering staff. Planner Teague responded that engineering staff recommends that the site provide a looped 6" DIP from Blake Road through to Lot 6 along the property line to Evanswood Lane; however, the applicant has not agreed to do so. Chair Platteter asked Planner Teague if the storm water pond to the west was private or public. Planner Teague responded that is a private pond. Applicant Presentation Kendra Lindahl introduced, Jack Perry, legal staff and Carrie Berman, daughter of applicant as part of the project team. Lindahl stressed how important it was to the applicant to minimize tree loss. She noted the applicant will continue to live in his home. • • Lindahl informed the Commission in response to staff's recommendation of a looped water line that they are hesitant to do so because they believe it would create more tree loss. Lindahl stated that as presented the storm water plan is responsive, adding there will be no net increase in rate or volume to surrounding properties. Lindahl also noted that in this area Edina has a downstream issue, adding in her opinion this site shouldn't be required to fix an area issue. Lindahl further commented that they respectfully request that the suggested B618 curb and gutter be eliminated and a flush ribbon curb built in its place. She pointed out flush ribbon curbs are very common in Edina and work well with rain gardens. Continuing, Lindahl stated with regard to the sidewalk condition they are not convinced every site should be required to have a sidewalk. She pointed out there are five homes on the cul de sac and the addition of a sidewalk creates challenges for the project. Lindahl said if a sidewalk is required to be built as a condition of approval they would prefer that the sidewalk was constructed on the north side. Concluding, Lindahl asked the Commission to eliminate the Fire Department's condition that the homes be sprinkled. Lindahl pointed out the State already has a sprinkling requirement based on square footage, adding they would like to abide by State Statutes, questioning if other new homes were required to be sprinkled. • Discussion Commissioner Carr commented that she could support a sidewalk on the north vs. south. Carr asked Ms. Lindahl to explain "ribbon" curb. With graphics Lindahl indicated ribbon curbs, adding that the reason they want them installed on the project was to ensure water flow. Ribbon curbs are designed to handle water run -off. Carr further asked the applicant if they prefer looped or dead ended. Lindahl responded they would prefer the dead ended main. Commissioner Lee questioned if the property owner would consider reducing the number of lots from seven to six. The applicants responded that the seven lot plat meets code, adding they have not considered reducing the number of lots. A brief discussion ensued on drainage. Ross Bintner addressed the Commission and explained with regard to the sidewalk requirement the sidewalk is not a code requirement it's a policy. Bintner further indicated that the B618 curb is also a policy, along with looped main vs. dead ended. Continuing, Bintner reported that the sprinkler requirement was from the Fire Department. Teague interjected and explained the Fire Department requested sprinkling because of the narrower street. Chair Platteter asked if the subdivision Acres Dubois had a looped main. Mr. Bintner responded Acres DuBois was not looped. Chair Platteter asked the applicant if the Watershed • District has weighed in on the project. Ms. Lindahl responded that they have been in contact • with the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District; however, they will not meet on the proposal until after it receives preliminary approval from the City. Public Hearing Chair Platteter opened the public hearing. The following residents expressed concerns with the proposed subdivision: Rebecca Wallin, 6208 Parkwood Road Charlie Gits, 5311 Evanswood Lane Kim Gits, 5311 Evanswood Lane Marty Wheeler, 6200 Parkwood Road Tim Kuck, 6316 Westwood Court Olaf Minge, 5525 Evanswood Lane Amy Minge, 5225 Evanswood Lane Concerns were expressed as follows: • Storm water management. Some areas already retain water careful consideration must be given to drainage and storm water management. • Increase in impervious surfaces — more water issues i• Change in density • Tree loss • Consider using existing driveway as shared vs. new street. • Decrease in property values • Years of living with continued construction • Rain garden maintenance — who's responsible, will they be maintained • Buffer • Visibility concerns. Site lines are compromised in this area - intersections are close and there is a grade change • The plan as presented is too dense, lots aren't in keeping with neighboring properties, consider reducing number of lots Commissioner Carr moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion Commissioners expressed the opinion that issues are unresolved and acknowledged the difficulty in finding balance. It was further noted that in Edina "one size doesn't fit all" and with no conclusions on specific drainage issues it; and other issues make it difficult to make an educated decision. It was further suggested that more creativity could be used in plat • development including limiting parking to only one side of the street, etc. • Chair Platteter asked Ms. Lindahl to comment on the tree loss and drainage issues raised by neighbors. Ms. Lindahl said she is unsure of the exact percentage of tree loss, but would have that calculated prior to the next meeting. Lindahl explained the proposed street was aligned so the fewest number of trees would be removed. Lindahl stated with regard to drainage that their proposal cannot solve the areas storm water and drainage problems; however, they can't make it worse, adding the proposed rain gardens are a critical part of stormwater management for the site. Chair Platteter noted that another concern expressed was sight line issues at the intersection of Blake and the new road. Platteter asked Lindahl to comment on that. Ms. Lindahl reported at the City's request WSB conducted a traffic analysis. The report indicated that sight lines are sufficient. She further noted that the applicant will enter into a Developers Agreement that not only addresses sight lines and site access but addresses retaining walls, rain gardens, water and sewer too. Lindahl said in the Agreement maintenance of the proposed wall, rain gardens, etc. are addressed. In response to comments from neighbors on prior tree loss Steve Gross reported that the site was being cleared of buckthorn and dead trees. A lengthy discussion ensued on the proposed subdivision and Engineers Memo dated March 30, 2015 with Commissioners expressing their hesitancy is supporting the preliminary plat in light of the fact that specific items in the storm water management plan were not sufficiently addressed to gain support of the Engineer. Commissioners were also divided on sidewalk or no sidewalk, style of curb /gutter and the number of lots, etc. Mr. Bintner stated that in his opinion his concerns can be addressed before the applicant returns for final plat. Bintner said he agrees with the majority of items in the memo; specifically numbers 2 and 8 through 21. He acknowledged issues with 3, 4 and 7; however reiterated in his opinion those issues could be agreed on. Bintner stressed from an Engineering standpoint their goal is to ensure that storm water does not increase the flood risk to upstream and downstream properties Commissioner Carr commented that she agrees all issues can be resolved; however, the Commission needs to recommend to the Council approval or denial with sufficient findings, adding some issues (curb gutter, sidewalk, etc.) need further clarification. Continuing, Carr said before final plat specific issues need to be resolved and the storm water management plan needs to be prepared in more detail. Commissioner Olsen commented that she believes if a motion is made it should include conditions that the applicant must provide adequate drawings as mentioned by Commissioner Carr) indicating how the water is distributed and how /if the applicant can gain rain garden easements. Mr. Gits interjected questioning if he can stub into the rain garden adjacent to his property. • Planner Teague responded that he believes Mr. Gits could stub into the rain garden; however, at his expense. Teague noted he believes the easements are public. r 10 The discussion continued on if the request should be continued allowing staff and applicants time to resolve any issues or vote the request up or down. Mntinn Commissioner Carr moved to recommend preliminary plat approval based on staff findings and conditions and subject to the following additions: • The developer can choose between the ribbon cut or B618 curb • The developer can choose between looped or dead end water main. • Water sprinklers not required (note State requirements would be enforced) • Comply with the principles of Living Street with the developer choosing which side of the street the sidewalk should go • Present a more detailed storm water, drainage and erosion control plan. • Address rain garden issues and potential flooding issues because of expressed concerns. Commissioner Hobbs seconded the motion. Commissioner Lee stated she cannot support the motion for approval. She said the conditions of approval are unclear and that she believes a decrease in the number of lots could mitigate drainage issues. Lee acknowledged the plat meets all requirements; however, in her opinion a balance must be reached. Commissioners Hobbs and Forrest indicated they would have to vote against the motion to approve. Mr. Perry said they would be willing to work with staff and grant a 30 -day extension. Chair Platteter called the vote. Ayes; Thorsen, Olsen, Carr. Nay; Hobbs, Lee Strauss, Nemerov, Forrest, Platteter. Motion failed. 3 -6. Commissioner Hobbs moved to continue the request for subdivision to allow time for staff and the applicant to resolve any issues. Commissioner Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to continue carried. VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Grandview Presentation Economic Development Manager, Bill Neuendorf addressed the Commission and reported on the redevelopment planning for the former public works site. 11 Neuendorf explained that City staff collaborated with Frauenshuh Design Team and prepared three preliminary concepts that reflect examples of a combination of public and privates uses. Continuing, Neuendorf noted an Open House to present the concepts is scheduled on April 22 "d Neuendorf presented to the Commission a power point presentation highlighting the three concepts as follows: • Arts & Culture Center • Multi Generation Community Center • Fitness /Wellness Center In conclusion Neuendorf said after the open house a public comment period will occur allowing time for the team to focus on one design scenario. Neuendorf explained the chosen design scenario(s) would also be presented to the Planning Commission for their review following the open house. A discussion ensued with Commissioners noting that Eden Avenue is the gateway and both Vernon Avenue and Arcadia are important corners. Blending the civic and private would take balance. Commissioners acknowledged there are also challenges with the site because of the grade changes, adding linking properties will be one challenge. Another point to consider would be cost and profitability. 10 Commissioner Lee referred to Scenario #3 and questioned the height of the tower and the square footage. Neuendorf said the tower is proposed at 10- stories and 14,000 to 15,000 square feet per floor. Lee expressed some concern with shadowing from the tower; however, said she liked the east/west linkage. Commissioner Forrest questioned how the data was collected. Neuendorf said he met with all boards and commissions and held numerous public meetings, advertised in the Sun Current and developed a website to collect input from the community. Neuendorf reported there was one vocal group that believed the site should be redeveloped as 100% public; however, there are many many different perspectives on what should be developed at this site. Neuendorf said a decision needs to be made, adding he found that most people appear to support both a public and private venture. Chair Platteter thanked Neuendorf for his update, adding the Commission looks forward to hearing from the team in the future. B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Chair Platteter suggested because of the late hour that the discussion on the Ordinance Amendments be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting on April 22nd. Commissioners Agreed. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS # Chair Platteter acknowledged back of packet materials. 12 • IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS • • Commissioner Forrest reported that last evening (April 7) the City Council approved the Wooddale Valley View Small Area Plan. Commissioner Hobbs informed the Commission one meeting has occurred for the France Southdale Area Work Group, adding he believes the group can craft a realistic vision of the greater Southdale area. X. STAFF COMMENTS None XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Thorsen moved meeting adjournment at 12:20 am. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to adjourn carried. -- -- -j 13 i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE VETERANS MEMORIAL COMMITTEE HELD AT CITY HALL March 27, 2015 7:30 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Olson called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. 11. ROLLCALL Answering roll call were Members Benson (arrived at 7:34 a.m.), Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Currie (arrived at 7:51 a.m.) Olson, Reed, and Schwartz Members Absent: Members Elliott, Kojetin and Schulstad Staff in attendance: Kristin Aarsvold, Edina Park and Recreation Department Supervisor Others in attendance: Tom Shirley, General Manager Centennial Lakes Park 111. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Member Schwartz requested that reference to his donation be taken out of the minutes. Ms. Aarsvold will amend the minutes accordingly. • Motion by Member Schwartz and seconded by Member Crain to approve the minutes of the February 27, 2015 Committee as amended. Ayes: Benson, Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Olson, Reed, and Schwartz. Motion carried. IV. UPDATE ON CONSTRUCTION A. Motion Approving Order of Medallions Chairman Olson reported that Member Elliott wanted to confirm with the Committee the correct order of the placards as the Army starting on the left, followed by the Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard and Merchant Marines on the far right. Motion by Chairman Olson and seconded by Member Cardarelle that the order of the medallions placed on the monument from left to right are Army, Marine Corp, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard and Merchant Marines. Ayes: Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Olson, Reed and Schwartz. Motion carried. B. Motion Approving Medallions Member Reed asked about the diameter of the medallions. Member Crain thought they were 8 inches in diameter and that they had been approved the Design Committee Meeting. Member Schwartz asked how they were affixed. Crain replied that they are slightly embedded into the • stone and that they were recessed so that they couldn't be pried off. Chairman Olson will e -mail Member Elliott and ask him to verify the size with Committee members. Motion by Chairman Olson and seconded by Member Cardarelle to approve the medallions that were attached to Member Elliott's March 26th e-mail as the medallions • that will be on the memorial. Ayes: Benson, Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Olson, Reed and Schwartz. Motion carried. V. UPDATE ON DONOR RECOGNITION Chairman Olson reported that he had started calling the list of donors and checking with them on how they want their names to appear on the memorial. He will finish calling this weekend. He has talked with Member Elliott and Broadway Award and sent them a mock -up of the size and names on the donor plaque. He expects a quote from Broadway today. He reported that Member Elliott has $2,000 for the donor plaque and another $5000 for the granite base in his budget. Chairman Olson also stated that he had requested the government font on the donor plaque. Member Christiaansen handed out the Draft List R3 for Committee members review. Committee Members discussed including the City's horticulturalist by name based on his current contributions and his future maintenance contribution. Discussion took place regarding changing the donor plaque category from "City Officials" to "City Officials and Staff' and adding him to this list; adding the City of Edina staff under the "In -Kind Gifts" category; the excellent City staff help and cooperation with this project; the need to recognize everyone that donated above and beyond; and the possibility that staff with similar contributions could be missed. Motion by Member Crain and seconded by Member Currie to list Tim Zimmerman under the "City Officials" category on the donor plaque and change the category to "City • Officials and Staff'. Ayes: Benson, Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Currie, Olson, Reed and Schwartz. Motion carried. IV. UPDATE ON CONSTRUCTION C. Update on Engraving Member Currie stated that he took the layouts that he received from the granite contractor and modified them. He then presented his proposed revisions to the Design Team. Chairman Olson stated that the design team should meet one last time and finalize the layouts so that Member Elliott can submit it to the granite company for engraving. Member Schwartz recommended that a subcommittee verify the correct spelling of the veteran names. Members Christiaansen and Reed will proof the spelling of the names. The latest mock -up will be discussed at the next Design Team meeting. Discussion took place regarding the timeline to complete the engraving. Member Currie will forward an e-mail dated February 27 from Member Elliott back to Member Elliott and inquire about the status of the project. The layout was approved by Committee members at the February 27, 2015 meeting. The Design Committee will try to meet the week of April 6th. Member Currie will check with the engraver regarding pertinent deadlines and communicate that information with other committee members. Members Benson and Currie will go over the listing of ranks and branches one last time. The listing will match the official Fort Snelling listing. Member Christiaansen asked about pending items on the donor plaque. Chairman Olson reported that he will talk to the Rotary Club of Edina Foundation today; that Murphy Granite/Washburn McGreavy will be on the same line; and that Barbara Bender will be listed under the "$1,000+ Donors" and taken off the "Veteran's Memorial Committee. Ms. Aarsvold has verified the City Council names. The number of additional donations from members of the community will be due next week. Member Crain asked the Committee about a statement at the bottom of the plaque. Committee members will check past minutes and notes for this statement. VI. CELEBRATION UPDATE Chairman Olson went over the celebration schedule. He reported that Senator Klobuchar will not be able to attend, he hasn't heard from Senator Franken and Representative Ellingson will try to attend. A veteran and donor will speak. He stated that he has talked to a Johnson family representative who has agreed to speak on behalf of a donor and veteran. There will be a military chaplain to do the dedication. He stated that Ms. Aarsvold is working on the tents and food. Member Schwartz inquired about the Boy Scouts. Ms. Aarsvold stated that she will have them contact the appropriate people to follow -up with. Member Schwartz asked for details regarding photographs before he starts working on them. Ms. Aarsvold asked if 100 chairs was appropriate and stated that tent rental was expensive especially because of the holiday. Member Currie asked about flag lining of the street. Ms. Aarsvold replied that the Boy Scouts will be • taking care of that including providing the flags. Ms. Aarsvold asked about addresses for those on the invitation lists. Member Schwartz will get the family addresses to Ms. Aarsvold. Chairman Olson will arrange to have a complete list of donors sent to Ms. Aarsvold. Following discussion, Ms. Aarsvold and Member Crain will check on the number of chairs that will fit into the space and Ms. Aarsvold will request the people mover. VII. OTHER Member Schwartz inquired about security and things that can be done to deter vandalism. The Committee discussed the lighting and signs. Member Currie reported that he had provided information on kiosks signs Member Christiaansen will schedule the next Design Meeting. Vlll. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:27 a.m. • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE • EDINA PARK BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL April 14, 2015 7 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Chair Gieseke called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Members Cella, Good, Strother, Jones, Gieseke, Segreto and Jacobson Member McCormick arrived at 7:11 p.m. Member Greene arrived at 7:29 p.m. Student Members: Chowdhury and Colwell Absent was Member Steel Ill. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Segreto made a motion, seconded by Member Good, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Segreto, Strother, Gieseke, Good, Cella, Jacobson, Jones. Motion carried. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA W.A. Approval of Minutes — Regular Park Board Meeting of Tuesday, March 10, 2015 • Member Segreto made a motion, seconded by Chair Gieseke, to make a change to the minutes on page four, third paragraph change "Member Segreto thought there would be an..." to "Member Segreto asked if there would be an ongoing management contract ". Ayes: Segreto, Cella, Gieseke, Good, Jacobson, Jones, Strother. Motion carried. Member Strother made a motion, seconded by Member Jones, to adopt the Minutes of the March 10, 2015 Park Board minutes with the changes requested. Ayes: Segreto, Cella, Gieseke, Good, Jacobson, Jones, Strother. Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT None VI. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS VI.A. Donations, Sponsorships and Advertising Policy Ms. Kattreh went through the Donations, Sponsorships and Advertising Policy with the Park Board. VI.B. Centennial Lakes Park Sculpture Donation Tom Shirley, General Manager of Centennial Lakes Park, informed the Park Board of the donation. Nick Legeros showed his sculptures and gave the history to the Park Board. • Member Segreto thanked Mr. Legeros and was pleased to see there were pedestals on the sculptures. She wondered if Mr. Legeros wanted the sculptures all together. Mr. Legeros replied they are spread apart in the park and the two children are actually on real stones and added they want these sculptures • to be indestructible. He stated in regard to pedestals, every artist has to consider what type of pedestal the sculptures are going to be on, depending on the size. Member Segreto thought at some point they need some curatorial review so they do not end up having a sculpture park that looks like a hodgepodge. Michael Frey, General Manager of the Edina Art Center, stated Member Segreto brought up a good point and that they have been working on that because there is no uniformity to the pedestals in the parks. Member Segreto stated she was at an arboretum and all of the sculptures were so close together that it looked discordant and she would hate to have the Edina parks look like that. Mr. Frey agreed and commented spacing is an issue so they need to be mindful of that as well. Chair Gieseke asked if there is a security guideline, has there been any theft of sculptures in Edina and how are they fastened down. Mr. Frey stated there has been theft and damage done to sculptures. Member Strother asked about unintentional damage and asked if they were made to be touched and climbed on. Mr. Legeros stated he has done many pieces and these are durable enough to be climbed upon. He noted the measures they go to in order to protect the sculptures from damage. Chair Gieseke stated he would like to expand on that and wondered if safety to children has been considered as well. Mr. Legeros replied he hopes people will interact with the sculptures and he tries to design the sculptures so there are not any sharp areas or places on the sculptures that will hurt people. Mr. Frey stated it is a primary concern of the Edina Art Center. Member Good asked if these were considered unrestricted donations or will there be restrictions to the donations to which Ms. Kattreh replied they will be considered a restricted donation. • Dick Crockett, Executive Director of the Edina Community Foundation, stated he was especially pleased to have this proposal come before the Park Board and City Council because it is within their mission to. bring people together to serve, strengthen and celebrate the community and this is what it is all about. Member Jones thought the sculptures were lovely and really appreciated the opportunity to see them. She commented she was curious about the process because she knows they do not get sculptures frequently to look at because they are not involved in that and wondered if this was going to be a new process where they will start seeing donations. Ms. Kattreh thought that was a good question and stated it was a decision by staff to bring this forward to the Park Board because in this case they are changing the use of a part of the park. This part of the park was not originally designed or intended to be sculpture pads and staff felt it was very important they were not making the decision to change this use of the park. She noted staff wants the Park Board to be able to weigh in on it along with the City Council in making the final decision on the acceptance of the sculptures. Barbara La Valleur, Public Art Edina working group member, stated they had a presentation by Mr. Legeros and the Arts and Culture Commission endorsed this and felt it was a very fine and high quality display of sculptures. She stated she was personally thrilled with the sculptures. Member Cella asked for information on how that part of the park is now being used and what putting the sculptures there would curtail or change so it can actually be discussed. Mr. Shirley responded right now the northeast part of the park is a natural grass area with a passive use of the park. He did not think the sculptures will change the use of that area of the park and will add to that passive use that is there and feels it would be a great addition to that area. Ms. La Valleur stated she has been with public • W art for years and the original intent for Centennial Lakes Park was to place public art in different areas, which are shown on the map. • Member Segreto asked if anyone else is seeing these sculptures in the light of being a memorial because she struggles a little bit with that. Chair Gieseke stated it concerns him as well and also brought that up and wondered if they want three sculptures with the same theme. Member Segreto stated that is why she was thinking about spacing them apart so that it would not appear to be such a memorial. She thought they also need to be thoughtful about portraying their community and would hope the images would show the growing diversity of the community. Mr. Legeros pointed out the girl is of Korean descent and there was never really a desire to make this a memorial. This was supposed to honor the people and history of the airline so he tried not to focus on things that would typically go into a memorial. Chair Gieseke stated he wanted to get an idea of the percentage of artwork that will be in the park. Mr. Shirley replied there has been talk in the past and there has always been some thought about artwork throughout the park in different areas, but we have not identified those areas. Ms. La Valleur stated a lot of it comes down to funding and someone having an idea of a sculpture. She thought this process would probably take 20 years before they would see four or five sculptures in Centennial Lakes Park. Ms. Kattreh stated she did not think it would be difficult to find a dozen different nice places in the original part of the park for public art. Member Strother stated what is important to her is if they are putting sculptures into an already established park that the park not turn into a museum and that it is allowed to be interactive, which is what these sculptures are going to be. • Member Jones stated that she would like to recognize that when someone is donating something as a memorial and is willing to fund art, she appreciates that it.is not a representation of the person and does not feel like a memorial at all. Mr. Crockett stated he just wanted to make the point that over the period of 10 years, this has amounted to a pretty significant investment for the city and added they have acquired approximately $250,000 in sculptures. VI.C. Park System Strategic Planning — Draft Report Terry Minarik from Confluence went through the Strategic Plan Draft with the Park Board. Member Jones asked Mr. Minarik if he was going to be defining the difference of what makes a community park versus a neighborhood park. Mr. Minarik responded this is an executive summary within the body of the park classification and in a later chapter it defines a community park, a neighborhood park, an enterprise facility, etc. He noted there is also an in -depth definition of each of those parks in the system and a summary of what amenities they have. Member Jones asked if the Park Board will be seeing this again to which Mr. Minarik indicated they will. Mr. Minarik explained they are moving forward to present the next draft through a City Council work session. He asked if the committee would like to meet prior to that for an overview before this is actually presented to the council. Member Good asked in regards to the use of the classifications, did the team find the classification • process useful in helping them to determine or discern things or are they just classifications. Mr. Minarik responded it is very useful especially when they begin to break it down; it helps them to identify how much of the city is actually covered by the park system. Member Cella stated regarding the acknowledgements, the Park Board is going to have to decide if it is • going to be the Park Board members who were present when they started or when they end or will they include everyone because it is not going to be the same list. She also pointed out that Member Jones name is missing. Ms. Kattreh stated to be honest she did not review the list and she would be interested in how the Park Board felt about it. Member Good wondered why they had to have an acknowledgement page. Member Segreto indicated she felt the same way. Ms. Kattreh indicated she thought it was standard in every strategic plan she has seen; however, she is open to doing it either way. Chair Gieseke commented that it gives some accountability as to who was there during the process. Mr. Minarik pointed out that some communities are very adamant about having it. Chair Gieseke stated in his opinion they should include everyone from start to finish to which Ms. Kattreh agreed. Mr. Minarik reviewed the park system with the board. Member Jones was not sure if they settled on if they provide a wide variety of high quality and innovative parks and recreation programs and facilities. She wondered if they were going to keep the wording as high quality. Mr. Minarik thought they talked about excellence as noted. Mr. Minarik continued with his presentation. Member McCormick stated there is a lot of activity that happens in the back half of 2015 and she wondered how that gets approved and what the process looks like. Ms. Kattreh indicated they need to talk a lot about that time frame because she felt it was very aggressive. Member McCormick asked when this will go to the City Council to which Mr. Minarik replied the City is will see it on May 6. Member McCormick thought that would give them enough time to work through this. Mr. Minarik continued reviewing the Strategic Plan with the board. Member McCormick asked if they have any trend information to which Mr. Minarik indicated they did. Member McCormick stated on page 44, the chart shows cross country skiing is down by nine percent. Mr. Minarik stated it is down nine percent nationally but up for Minnesota in general. Member McCormick thought they might want to make note of this so it is more specific. Member Jacobson asked if there was a place where they recommend what kind of new things Edina should be looking to add to the parks they do not already have. Mr. Minarik stated some of the recommendations coming forward come from the demographic and trend findings. He pointed out this is through the Level of Service section, where they talk about where Edina fits in. Member Cella stated she would like to see the whole trending section reformatted so they can look specifically at more state and local trends. Mr. Minarik responded they could definitely do that. Member Segreto asked if there was any part of this plan that Ms. Kattreh would like the Park Board to focus more on in terms of helping get staff a tool that would be useful to use. Ms. Kattreh stated that is a great question. She wants to make sure that when they get to the recommendations at the end that it has everything they want to see addressed in the parks system and that it is spelled out clearly in the report. The most important part of the plan to focus attention on is the Implementation Plan. Member • Segreto stated she felt overwhelmed commenting on the whole document in general and decided to 4 focus in on the portions of the plan that are important to her such as 4.1, 4.2, and the natural areas, assuming the rest of the Park Board members are looking at the rest of the plan that is important to " isthem. She asked if it would make sense that they break the plan apart so that they know the whole plan is getting attention rather than just a part of it because the document is overwhelming. Mr. Minarik stated he did not expect them to come back with all of their comments at this meeting. They knew it would take the board some time to review it and they would love it if the board looked at the recommendations and implementation process. Member McCormick thought that is a really good idea to break this down and have different board members look at different sections of the plan. Ms. Kattreh thought that was a great idea too. Member Good stated this is a great body of work but what he saw as he looked at comments was strategy. When he looks at strategy, it is about making choices and to some degree when he read the plan there is a list of everything. Without yet any guidance for them as a board, how do they say no to things and feel it is the right thing to do because they have made a decision that this is what they want to build. He felt it was missing some direction around what the strategic themes are. Mr. Minarik stated if they could begin to list those things that would be helpful and have all of the goals have priorities. Member Good stated if it's a needs to be done, that is a red flag and needs to be addressed but there are 14 different goals with items under them and he sensed it is a list of things they want to get accomplished but no direct path. Member Jacobson stated one thing she was trying to do was put on her tactical hat and use this as a document that would push her forward to have some kind of direction. Mr. Minarik thought there is currently a replacement plan within the system for some things that are out there. He stated this is a big checklist for them too. Member Jacobson thought there were some key things they were hoping to get such as a replacement plan in place and some kind of way to try to figure out if there is equity in the different parks. Mr. Minarik stated they have had discussions about making a plan for the park buildings, repairs and replacements and they are trying to figure out how to recommend a plan moving forward. Member Jacobson asked if they also go as high a level as helping the board figure out if they want mini or mega parks and how do they choose those parks. Mr. Minarik stated the other thing they found too was that they have general open space and they need to determine what to do with that space. Member Jacobson asked what in the plan guides them to make the discussions that the city needs them to make to which Mr. Minarik replied they are going to make those recommendations to the board. Mr. Minarik continued with his presentation. Member Jones stated when they are looking at the benchmark figures she thought it would be useful to see national trends. Mr. Minarik responded he will try to think of how they can incorporate that into the plan. Member Jones asked if there is a map of where there are playgrounds. Mr. Minarik recalled there is one but was not sure if it was in the document. Member McCormick stated she thought it would be helpful to have that in the document with the demographic information. Member Jones asked if they could include school playgrounds and Member Jacobson asked if school locations could also be included. SMr. Minarik continued with the review of the Strategic Plan. Member McCormick asked if they could show on the plan where the trails currently exist and where trails are proposed to which Mr. Minarik responded they could show that. Member McCormick stated if they have data that shows where they are missing trails that would be helpful. Mr. Minarik stated they could change the color to show the different types of trails. Ms. Kattreh thought that might be helpful and they could show in a different color what is a designated trail and what is a sidewalk or on- street shared bike trail. Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that she recently had a really good meeting with Ms. Faus, Mr. Minarik and Mark Nolan from the Engineering Department. She indicated that conversation alone sparked so many ideas and so many comments. She noted it is really going to help them move forward with the Engineering Department as they are preparing sidewalk and road construction plans as well as figuring out the timing and how some of the sidewalk and trails can be incorporated into this larger plan. Member Good asked what is the rank priority based on to which Mr. Minarik replied it is based on the level of service analysis and the benchmarking. Member Cella asked Mr. Minarik to tell them a little about the Senior Center because that comes up really high. She indicated she did not see any verbiage what is needed beyond what they already have. Mr. Minarik stated what came up was through the focus groups, people came forward and said the Senior Center was not necessarily used the way it could be used because the space is actually bigger than what they are using it for. He stated another thing that came up was the fact that the name of the Senior Center should be changed to a more community center or multi - generational facility. The board discussed how they can improve the programming for the Senior Center. Mr. Minarik continued with the presentation. Member Good thought in the program area of the report they could have some real support in having a fit to mission so they know why they are developing the program. Mr. Minarik stated one of the things they talked about is the city is more in the job of introducing things to people then once they become proficient in them then they go to the specialists. Member Good stated there seems to be a thread going through here about wanting the city to stay involved and help to manage the other programs. Mr. Minarik agreed. Member Jones asked if there was a way to find out if the people using the facilities are residents. Mr. Minarik thought it can be tracked by registration. Ms. Kattreh indicated it could. Member Jones asked if that could be put into the report to which Mr. Minarik thought it could. Ms. Kattreh noted 95% of the program users are residents. Member Jacobson stated as she looked at the list of operational costs and funding opportunities, one thing she did not see on the list is facility rentals and they have talked in the past about being able to rent out rooms in the Senior Center or wherever there is room. Mr. Minarik asked if this is something they currently take advantage of. Ms. Kattreh indicated it was and is a big revenue source for them. Member Good stated he read both the vision and mission statement and they seemed similar to him. He wondered what their vision is as a group. Mr. Minarik stated this is a placeholder and they are working on the vision statement, and it will be added to the document. Chair Gieseke asked how they can make sure this is implementable and actionable. Ms. Kattreh explained they want to make sure the implementation pages are clear and accurate and follow the direction that staff, Park Board, and City Council see for the city. She wants this to be a document that • informs but also drives the work that the Park Board and staff have going forward for the next 10 years. M Mr. Minarik thought that the thing they can do is clarify the priorities and strategies that are most achievable and show early success. Student Member Chowdhury stated this might be redundant but this document has gone through many surveys in terms of what specific demographic is more inclined to do a specific activity and he thought this was important in considering when they take action to renovate something that they are not doing it without recognizing if people will use it and not just renovate it to use up funds. Student Member Colwell stated he liked Member Good's comment regarding the vision and the discrepancy between the vision and the mission statement. The mission statement should be more of a description of what they do as a community and a Park Board whereas the vision is what they hope to achieve from what they do as a community. Staff reviewed with the Park Board the timeline for the Park System Strategic Planning. Member Segreto indicated she would look at sections 4.1 and 4.2. Member Jones stated she would look at section 4.3. Member Strother indicated she would look at section 4.5 and Member McCormick indicated she would look at section 4.6. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VII.A. Council Updates No discussion. VII.B. Veteran's Memorial Committee No discussion. Vlll. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Member Gieseke stated later in the summer they would like to have an offsite retreat type of meeting to discuss items and get to know each other better. Member Greene stated the Edina Soccer Club is going to donate a $50,000 floor that will go inside the new outdoor hockey rink during the summer months and will be utilized to play futsal, which is a form of soccer. It will allow for outdoor use of futsal and they will be able to get 5,000 hours of kids playing in a covered area. IX. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Kattreh went through her list of staff comments. Ms. Susan Faus gave an update on the Veteran's Memorial Project. x ADJOURNMENT Chair Gieseke made a motion, seconded by Member Greene, to adjourn the meeting at 9:14 p.m. Ayes: Members Cella, Jones, Gieseke, Jacobson, McCormick, Segreto, Greene, Good, Strother Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m. n 7 MINUTES is OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MAY 6, 2015 10:15 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Chair Hovland called the HRA meeting to order at 1 1: 17 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson and Chair Hovland. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Motion made by Commissioner Swenson, seconded by Commissioner Stewart approving the Meeting Agenda. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 7, 2015 APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Brindle, seconded by Commissioner Swenson approving the Minutes of the Meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority for April 7, 2015. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -01 SUPPORTING APPLICATION OF BEACON INTERFAITH • HOUSING COLLABORATIVE FOR HOUSING TAX CREDITS FROM MHFA Chair Hovland noted the next item had been acted upon by the City Council and the HRA needed to also adopt a resolution supporting Beacon's application with the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. Economic Development Manager informed the HRA that Beacon had just been notified they were the recipient of a Hennepin County Grant that would help fund the project on West 66th Street. Commissioner Brindle made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Swenson adopting Resolution No. 2015 -01 supporting the application of Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative for housing tax credits from the Minnesota Housing Finance Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. ADJOURNMENT Chair Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 11:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Scott Neal, Executive Director r: Page I • • To: Members of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority From: Eric Roggeman, Finance Director Date: May 19, 2015 A, o e 0 �a�sta Agenda Item #: V Action FA Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Subject: Resolution No. 2015 -02 Providing For The Sale Of Bonds, Series 2015 Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 2015 -02 Providing for the Sale of $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 Information / Background: The $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 are for a current refunding of the remaining maturities of the $5,425,000 Public Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2005. The Series 2005 Bonds were originally issued to finance the construction of two gymnasiums. Debt service is paid from annually appropriated funds derived from a tax levy. The refunding is expected to produce debt service savings over the next I I years. The results of the bond sale will be presented to the City Council at the June 16 Council meeting by the City's Financial Advisors; Ehlers Inc. ATTACHMENT: Resolution 2015 -02 Pre -Sale Report for $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Page 2 Resolution No. 2015 -02 Resolution Providing for the Sale of $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 A. WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the Authority's $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 (the "Bonds "), to finance a current refunding of the outstanding maturities of the Authority's $5,425,000 Public Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2005; and B. WHEREAS, the Authority has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ( "Ehlers "), as its independent financial advisor for the Bonds in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization; Findings. The Board of Commissioners hereby authorizes Ehlers to assist the Authority for the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The Board of Commissioners shall meet at 7:00 p.m. on June 16, 2015, for the purpose of considering proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the Authority are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the Authority upon its completion. Approved this 19th day of May, 2015. Attest: Ann Swenson, Secretary James B. Hovland, Chair STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Executive Director of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina Housing and Redevelopments at its Regular Meeting of May 19, 2015 and as recorded in the minutes of said regular meeting. • • WITNESS my hand officially as said Secretary this day of , 20 Scott H. Neal, Executive Director • �i May 19, 2015 Pre -Sale Report for EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 0 1-0 OP-4 Prepared by: Mark Ruff Senior Municipal Advisor _f. Nick Anhut Municipal Advisor • 1- 800 -552 -1171 1 www.ehlers- inc.com Executive Summary of Proposed Debt Proposed Issue: $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 (the "Bonds ") Purposes: The proposed issue includes financing for a current refunding of the remaining maturities of the Authority's $5,425,000 Public Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2005 (the "Series 2005 Bonds "). The Series 2005 Bonds were originally issued to finance the construction of two gymnasiums maintained by the Edina School District. Debt service is paid from annually appropriated funds derived from a tax levy. Interest rates on the obligations proposed to be refunded are 4.0% to 4.15 %. Current market estimates for the refunding are below 2.5 %. The refunding is expected to produce debt service savings of approximately $288,000 over the next 11 years, or $26,100 per year. The net present value benefit of the refunding is estimated to be $256,000, or 6.5% of the refunded debt. This refunding is considered to be a current refunding as the obligations being refunded are either callable (pre - payable) now, or will be within 90 days of the date of issue of the new Bonds. Authority: The Bonds are being issued under Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 469 and 475. Term /Call Feature: The Bonds are being issued for an 11 year term. Principal on the Bonds will be due on May I in the years 2016 through 2026. Interest is payable every six months beginning November 1, 2015. The Bonds maturing on and after May 1, 2025 will be subject to prepayment at the discretion of the Authority on May 1, 2024 or any date thereafter. Bank Qualification: Because the Authority is expecting to issue no more than $10,000,000 in tax exempt debt during the calendar year, the Authority will be able to designate the Bonds as "bank qualified" obligations. Bank qualified status broadens the market for the Bonds, which can result in lower interest rates. Rating: The Authority's most recent annual appropriation bond issues were rated "AA +" by Standard & Poor's and "Aa2" by Moody's Investors Service. Both agencies set their ratings below that of a City's General Obligation debt due to the perceived risk associated with an annual appropriation pledge. The Moody's rating is set an additional notch below the City's rating because it deems the recreation facility to be "non- essential", unlike a public works facility or city hall. The Authority will request new ratings for the Bonds. Basis for Recommendation: Based on our knowledge of your situation, your objectives communicated to us, our advisory relationship as well as characteristics of various municipal financing options, we are recommending the issuance of annual appropriation bonds through a competitive sale process as a suitable financing option because: Presale Report May 19, 2015 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota Page 1 • • e CJ Presale Report Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota May 19, 2015 Page 2 - It meets the Authority's savings objectives. - Given the City's high bond ratings and stature in the marketplace, this is a cost effective option for low interest rates that still maintains future flexibility for the repayment of debt. You do not expect to prepay the Bonds in the next eight to nine years. - This security is in keeping with the original obligation and is consistent with your existing practices and policies to finance these types of projects with this type of debt issue. Method of Sale /Placement: In order to obtain the lowest interest cost to the Authority, we will competitively bid the purchase of the Bonds from local and national underwriters/banks. We have included an allowance for discount bidding equal to 1.20% of the principal amount of the issue. The discount is treated as an interest item and provides the underwriter with all or a portion of their compensation in the transaction. If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount (maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to lower your borrowing amount. Premium Bids: Under current market conditions, most investors in municipal bonds prefer "premium" pricing structures. A premium is achieved when the coupon for any maturity (the interest rate paid by the issuer) exceeds the yield to the investor, resulting in a price paid that is greater than the face value of the bonds. The sum of the amounts paid in excess of face value is considered "reoffering premium." The amount of the premium varies, but it is not uncommon to see premiums for new issues in the range of 2.00% to 10.00% of the face amount of the issue. This means that an issuer with a $2,000,000 offering may receive bids that result in proceeds of $2,040,000 to $2,200,000. Because this is a refunding and there is no need for additional proceeds, for this issue of Bonds we have been directed to use the premium to reduce the size of the issue. The adjustments may slightly change the true interest cost of the original bid, either up or down. You have the choice to limit the amount of premium in the bid specifications. This may result in fewer bids, but it may also eliminate large adjustments on the day of sale and other uncertainties. Review of Existing Debt: We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the Authority and find that, other than the obligations proposed to be refunded by the Bonds, there are no other refunding opportunities at this time. We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the Authority's outstanding debt and will alert you to any future refunding opportunities. Presale Report Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota May 19, 2015 Page 2 Continuing Disclosure: Because the Authority has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt (including this issue) and this issue is over $1,000,000, the Authority will be agreeing to provide certain updated Annual Financial Information and its Audited Financial Statement annually as well as providing notices of the occurrence of certain "material events" to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the "MSRB "), as required by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Authority is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing bonds, and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare and file the reports. Arbitrage Monitoring: Because the Bonds are tax- exempt securities /tax credit securities, the Authority must ensure compliance with certain Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules throughout the life of the issue. These rules apply to all gross proceeds of the issue, including initial bond proceeds and investment earnings in construction, escrow, debt service, and any reserve funds. How issuers spend bond proceeds and how they track interest earnings on funds (arbitrage /yield restriction compliance) are common subjects of IRS inquiries. Your specific responsibilities will be detailed in the Signature, No- Litigation, Arbitrage Certificate and Purchase Price Receipt prepared by your Bond Attorney and provided at closing. You have retained Ehlers to assist you with compliance with these rules. Risk Factors: Current Refunding: The Bonds are being issued for the purpose of current refunding prior Authority debt obligations. Those prior debt obligations are "callable" now and can therefore be paid off within 90 days or less. The new Bonds will not be pre - payable until May 1, 2024. This refunding is being undertaken based in part on an assumption that the Authority does not expect to have future revenues to pay off this debt and that market conditions warrant the refinancing at this time. Other Service Providers: This debt issuance will require the engagement of other public finance service providers. This section identifies those other service providers, so Ehlers can coordinate their engagement on your behalf. Where you have previously used a particular firm to provide a service, we have assumed that you will continue that relationship. For services you have not previously required, we have identified a service provider. Fees charged by these service providers will be paid from proceeds of the obligation, unless you notify us that you wish to pay them from other sources. Our pre -sale bond sizing includes a good faith estimate of these fees, so their final fees may vary. If you have any questions pertaining to the identified service providers or their role, or if you would like to use a different service provider please contact us. Bond Attorney: Dorsey & Whitney LLP Paying Agent: U.S. Bank National Association Rating Agency: Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investors Service This presale report summarizes our understanding of the Authority's objectives for the structure and terms of this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital markets conditions change, we may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this financing to achieve results consistent with the Authority's objectives. Presale Report May 19, 2015 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota Page 3 • • is C Proposed Debt Issuance Schedule Pre -Sale Review by HRA Board: May 19, 2015 Distribute Official Statement: Week of June 1, 2015 Conference with Rating Agency: Week of June 1, 2015 HRA Board Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: June 16, 2015 Estimated Closing Date: July 15, 2015 Redemption Date for Series 2005 Bond: On or about August 1, 2015 Attachments Sources and Uses of Funds Proposed Debt Service Schedule Refunding Savings Analysis Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed With Bond Sale Ehlers Contacts Financial Advisors: Disclosure Coordinator: Financial Analyst: Mark Ruff Nick Anhut Wendy Lundberg Alicia Gage (651) 697 -8505 (651) 697 -8507 (651) 697 -8540 (651) 697 -8551 The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the Board of Commissioners at their home address or e- mailed for review prior to the sale date. Presale Report Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota May 19, 2015 Page 4 Edina HR.A, Minnesota $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 • Proposed Current Refunding of Series 2005A Assumes Current Market BQ "AA+/Aa2" Rates plus 15bps Sources & Uses Dated 07/15120151 Delivered 07/15/2015 Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $3,655,000.00 Total Sources $3,655,000.00 Uses Of Funds Total Underwriter's Discount (1.200%) 43,860.00 Costs of Issuance 56,000.00 Deposit to Current Refunding Fund 3,550,610.94 - - ---- - Rounding Amount Total Uses $3,655,000.00 Series 2015 HRA Pub ProjR I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 5113/2015 1 11:12 AM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE • Edina HRA, Minnesota $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 Proposed Current Refunding of Series 2005A Assumes Current Market BQ "AA + /Aa2" Rates plus 15bps Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I Fiscal Total 07/15/2015 - - - 11/01/2015 - - 20,335.81 20,335.81 - 05/01/2016 315,000.00 0.600% 34,532.50 349,532.50 369,868.31 11/01/2016 - - 33,587.50 33,587.50 - 05/01/2017 305,000.00 0.950% 33,587.50 338,587.50 372,175.00 11/01/2017 - - 32,138.75 32,138.75 - 05/01/2018 310,000.00 1.200% 32,138.75 342,138.75 374,277.50 11/01/2018 - - 30,278.75 30,278.75 - 05/01/2019 315,000.00 1.450% 30,278.75 345,278.75 375,557.50 11/01/2019 - - 27,995.00 27,995.00 - 05/01/2020 320,000.00 1.650% 27,995.00 347,995.00 375,990.00 11/01/2020 - - 25,355.00 25,355.00 - 05/01/2021 325,000.00 1.850% 25,355.00 350,355.00 375,710.00 11/01/2021 - - 22,348.75 22,348.75 - 05/01/2022 335,000.00 2.050_ %0 22,348.75 357,348.75 379,697.50 11/01/2022 - - 18,915.00 18,915.00 - 05/01/2023 345,000.00 2.300% 18,915.00 363,915.00 382,830.00 11/01/2023 - - 14,947.50 14,947.50 - 05/01/2024 350,000.00 2.550% 14,947.50 364,947.50 379,895.00 11/01/2024 - - 10,485.00 10,485.00 - 05/01/2025 11/01/2025 360,000.00 2.700% 10,485.00 5,625.00 370,485.00 5,625.00 _ _ 380,970.00 05/01/2026 375,000.00 3.000% 5,625.00 380,625.00 386,250.00 Total $3,6559000.00 - $498,220.81 $4,153,220.81 - Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $21,893.69 .._....__ ... .__- _..._......... —. Avera eg�Life 5.990 Years Average Coupon - _ ........................... ......................2.2756361 % Net Interest Cost (NIC) 2.4759677% True Interest Cost TIC 2.4784620% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.2589523% All Inclusive Cost (AIC) 2.7642793% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 2.2756361% - -- Weighted Average Maturity 5.990 Years Series 2015 HRA Pub ProjR I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 5/1312015 1 11:12 AM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Edina HRA, Minnesota $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 Proposed Current Refunding of Series 2005A Assumes Current Market BQ "AA + /Aa2" Rates plus 15bps Debt Service Comparison Date Total P +I Net New D/S Old Net D/S Savings 05/01/2016 369,868.31 365,339.25 397,443.76 Gross PV Debt Service Savings ..................... 32,104.51 05/01/2017 372,175.00 372,175.00 397,243.76 Net Present Value Benefit 25,068.76 05/01 /2018 374,277.50 374,277.50 401,643.76 Net PV Benefit/ $3,515,000 Refunded Principal... 27,366.26 05/01/2019 375,557.50 375,557.50 400,443.76 Refunding Datcd Date 24,886.26 05/01/2020 375,990.00 375,990.00 403,843.76 27,853.76 05/01/2021 375,710.00 375,710.00 401,643.76 25,933.76 05/01/2022 379,697.50 379,697.50 404,043.76 24,346.26 05/01/2023 382,830.00 382,830.00 405,843.76 23,013.76 05/01/2024 379,895.00 379,895.00 406,612.50 26,717.50 05/01/2025 380,970.00 380,970.00 -- 406,762.50 --____......._- 25,792.50 ---- ..............---- _........__._- 05/01/2026 ......._.___. —._. _..._._....__ 386,250.00 _.._..___._.._._._ 386,250.00 411,293.76 25,043.76 Total $4,153,220.81 $4,148,691.75 $4,436,818.84 $288,127.09 PV Analysis Summary (Net to Net) Gross PV Debt Service Savings ..................... 252,270.76 Net PV Cashflow Savigp 2.259 %(Bond Yield) ..... 252,270.76 Contingency or Rounding Amount .................... 4,529.06 Net Present Value Benefit $256,799.82 , Net PV Benefit / $3,907,270.76 PV Refunded Debt Service 6.572% Net PV Benefit/ $3,515,000 Refunded Principal... 7.306% Net PV Benefit/ $3,655,000 Refunding Principal.. 7.026% Refunding Bond Information Refunding Datcd Date 7/15/2015 RefimdTg Delivery Date 7/15/2015 41 Series 2015 HRA Pub ProjR I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 5113/2015 1 11:12 AM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Edina HRA, MN • $5,425,000 HRA Public Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2005A Debt Service To Maturity And To Call Refunded Refunded Refunded Date Bonds Interest D/S To Call Principal Coupon Interest D/S 07/15/2015 - 08/01/2015 3,515,000.00 35,610.94 3,550,610.94 - - 11/01/2015 - - - 71,221.88 71,221.88 05/01/2016 255,000.00 4.000% 71,221.88 326,221.88 11/01/2016 - - - 66,121.88 66,121.88 05/01/2017 265,000.00 4.000% 66,121.88 331,121.88 11/01/2017 - - 60,821.88 60,821.88 05/01/2018 280,000.00 4.000% 60,821.88 340,821.88 11/01/2018 - - - - 55,221.88 55,221.88 05/01/2019 - 290,000.00 4.000% 55,221.88 345,221.88 11/01/2019 - - - 49,421.88 49,421.88 05/01/2020 - - - 305,000.00 4.000% 49,421.88 354,421.88 11/01/2020 - - - - 43,321.88 43,321.88 05/01/2021 - - 315,000.00 4.000% 43,321.88 358,321.88 11/01/2021 - - - - 37,021.88 37,021.88 05/01/2022 - 330,000.00 4.000% 37,021.88 367,021.88 11/01/2022 - - - 30,421.88 30,421.88 05/01/2023 345,000.00 4.125% 30,421.88 375,421.88 11/01/2023 - - - 23,306.25 23,306.25 05/01/2024 - 360,000.00 _4_125 %0 23,306.25 383,306.25 11/01/2024 05/01/2025 - 375,000.00 - 4.125% 15,881.25 15,881.25 15,881.25 390,881.25 11/01/2025 - - 8,146.88 8,146.88 05/01/2026 395,000.00 4.125% 8,146.88 403,146.88 Total S3,515,000.00 535,610.94 $3,550,610.94 53,515,000.00 - $921,818.84 $4,436,818.84 Yield Statistics Base date for Avg. Life & Avg. Coupon Calculation 7/15/2015 Average Life 6.225 Years Average Coupon 4.0787838% Weighted Average Maturity (Paz Basis) 6.225 Years Refunding Bond Information Refunding, Dated Date 7/15/2015 Refunding Delivery Date 7115/2015 0 2005A Pub Prj Rev Bds CR I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 5/13/2015 1 11:12 AM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Commissioner Resolution No. introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Resolution Providing for the Sale of 53,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 A. WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the Authority's $3,655,000 Public Project Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 (the "Bonds "), to finance a current refunding of the outstanding maturities of the Authority's $5,425,000 Public Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2005; and B. WHEREAS, the Authority has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ( "Ehlers "), as its independent financial advisor for the Bonds in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization. Findings. The Board of Commissioners hereby authorizes Ehlers to assist the Authority for the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The Board of Commissioners shall meet at 7:00 p.m. on June 16, 2015, for the purpose of considering proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the Authority are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the Authority upon its completion. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following Commissioners voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Dated this 19'" day of May, 2015. Executive Director • is